Total
506 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2022-1252 | 1 Sir | 1 Gnuboard | 2024-09-19 | 8.2 High |
| Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm in GitHub repository gnuboard/gnuboard5 prior to and including 5.5.5. A vulnerability in gnuboard v5.5.5 and below uses weak encryption algorithms leading to sensitive information exposure. This allows an attacker to derive the email address of any user, including when the 'Let others see my information.' box is ticked off. Or to send emails to any email address, with full control of its contents | ||||
| CVE-2024-30098 | 1 Microsoft | 20 Windows 10 1507, Windows 10 1607, Windows 10 1809 and 17 more | 2024-09-17 | 7.5 High |
| Windows Cryptographic Services Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability | ||||
| CVE-2024-45394 | 2 Authenticator, Authenticator-extension | 2 Authenticator, Authenticator | 2024-09-17 | 8.8 High |
| Authenticator is a browser extensions that generates two-step verification codes. In versions 7.0.0 and below, encryption keys for user data were stored encrypted at-rest using only AES-256 and the EVP_BytesToKey KDF. Therefore, attackers with a copy of a user's data are able to brute-force the user's encryption key. Users on version 8.0.0 and above are automatically migrated away from the weak encoding on first login. Users should destroy encrypted backups made with versions prior to 8.0.0. | ||||
| CVE-2020-4174 | 1 Ibm | 1 Security Guardium Insights | 2024-09-17 | 7.5 High |
| IBM Security Guardium Insights 2.0.1 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 174683. | ||||
| CVE-2020-4624 | 1 Ibm | 1 Cloud Pak For Security | 2024-09-17 | 5.3 Medium |
| IBM Cloud Pak for Security 1.3.0.1 (CP4S) uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms during negotiation could allow an attacker to decrypt sensitive information. | ||||
| CVE-2022-1434 | 2 Netapp, Openssl | 43 A250, A250 Firmware, A700s and 40 more | 2024-09-17 | 5.9 Medium |
| The OpenSSL 3.0 implementation of the RC4-MD5 ciphersuite incorrectly uses the AAD data as the MAC key. This makes the MAC key trivially predictable. An attacker could exploit this issue by performing a man-in-the-middle attack to modify data being sent from one endpoint to an OpenSSL 3.0 recipient such that the modified data would still pass the MAC integrity check. Note that data sent from an OpenSSL 3.0 endpoint to a non-OpenSSL 3.0 endpoint will always be rejected by the recipient and the connection will fail at that point. Many application protocols require data to be sent from the client to the server first. Therefore, in such a case, only an OpenSSL 3.0 server would be impacted when talking to a non-OpenSSL 3.0 client. If both endpoints are OpenSSL 3.0 then the attacker could modify data being sent in both directions. In this case both clients and servers could be affected, regardless of the application protocol. Note that in the absence of an attacker this bug means that an OpenSSL 3.0 endpoint communicating with a non-OpenSSL 3.0 endpoint will fail to complete the handshake when using this ciphersuite. The confidentiality of data is not impacted by this issue, i.e. an attacker cannot decrypt data that has been encrypted using this ciphersuite - they can only modify it. In order for this attack to work both endpoints must legitimately negotiate the RC4-MD5 ciphersuite. This ciphersuite is not compiled by default in OpenSSL 3.0, and is not available within the default provider or the default ciphersuite list. This ciphersuite will never be used if TLSv1.3 has been negotiated. In order for an OpenSSL 3.0 endpoint to use this ciphersuite the following must have occurred: 1) OpenSSL must have been compiled with the (non-default) compile time option enable-weak-ssl-ciphers 2) OpenSSL must have had the legacy provider explicitly loaded (either through application code or via configuration) 3) The ciphersuite must have been explicitly added to the ciphersuite list 4) The libssl security level must have been set to 0 (default is 1) 5) A version of SSL/TLS below TLSv1.3 must have been negotiated 6) Both endpoints must negotiate the RC4-MD5 ciphersuite in preference to any others that both endpoints have in common Fixed in OpenSSL 3.0.3 (Affected 3.0.0,3.0.1,3.0.2). | ||||
| CVE-2020-4254 | 1 Ibm | 1 Security Guardium Big Data Intelligence | 2024-09-17 | 7.5 High |
| IBM Security Guardium Big Data Intelligence 1.0 (SonarG) uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 175560. | ||||
| CVE-2018-1996 | 1 Ibm | 1 Websphere Application Server | 2024-09-17 | N/A |
| IBM WebSphere Application Server 7.0, 8.0, 8.5, and 9.0 could provide weaker than expected security, caused by the improper TLS configuration. A remote attacker could exploit this vulnerability to obtain sensitive information using man in the middle techniques. IBM X-Force ID: 154650. | ||||
| CVE-2019-3736 | 1 Dell | 5 Emc Idpa Dp4400, Emc Idpa Dp5800, Emc Idpa Dp8300 and 2 more | 2024-09-17 | 7.2 High |
| Dell EMC Integrated Data Protection Appliance versions prior to 2.3 contain a password storage vulnerability in the ACM component. A remote authenticated malicious user with root privileges may potentially use a support tool to decrypt encrypted passwords stored locally on the system to use it to access other components using the privileges of the compromised user. | ||||
| CVE-2020-4937 | 5 Hp, Ibm, Linux and 2 more | 7 Hp-ux, Aix, I and 4 more | 2024-09-17 | 7.5 High |
| IBM Sterling B2B Integrator Standard Edition 5.2.0.0 through 6.0.3.2 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 191814. | ||||
| CVE-2020-4614 | 1 Ibm | 1 Data Risk Manager | 2024-09-17 | 7.5 High |
| IBM Data Risk Manager (iDNA) 2.0.6 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 184927. | ||||
| CVE-2021-23839 | 4 Openssl, Oracle, Redhat and 1 more | 9 Openssl, Business Intelligence, Enterprise Manager For Storage Management and 6 more | 2024-09-17 | 3.7 Low |
| OpenSSL 1.0.2 supports SSLv2. If a client attempts to negotiate SSLv2 with a server that is configured to support both SSLv2 and more recent SSL and TLS versions then a check is made for a version rollback attack when unpadding an RSA signature. Clients that support SSL or TLS versions greater than SSLv2 are supposed to use a special form of padding. A server that supports greater than SSLv2 is supposed to reject connection attempts from a client where this special form of padding is present, because this indicates that a version rollback has occurred (i.e. both client and server support greater than SSLv2, and yet this is the version that is being requested). The implementation of this padding check inverted the logic so that the connection attempt is accepted if the padding is present, and rejected if it is absent. This means that such as server will accept a connection if a version rollback attack has occurred. Further the server will erroneously reject a connection if a normal SSLv2 connection attempt is made. Only OpenSSL 1.0.2 servers from version 1.0.2s to 1.0.2x are affected by this issue. In order to be vulnerable a 1.0.2 server must: 1) have configured SSLv2 support at compile time (this is off by default), 2) have configured SSLv2 support at runtime (this is off by default), 3) have configured SSLv2 ciphersuites (these are not in the default ciphersuite list) OpenSSL 1.1.1 does not have SSLv2 support and therefore is not vulnerable to this issue. The underlying error is in the implementation of the RSA_padding_check_SSLv23() function. This also affects the RSA_SSLV23_PADDING padding mode used by various other functions. Although 1.1.1 does not support SSLv2 the RSA_padding_check_SSLv23() function still exists, as does the RSA_SSLV23_PADDING padding mode. Applications that directly call that function or use that padding mode will encounter this issue. However since there is no support for the SSLv2 protocol in 1.1.1 this is considered a bug and not a security issue in that version. OpenSSL 1.0.2 is out of support and no longer receiving public updates. Premium support customers of OpenSSL 1.0.2 should upgrade to 1.0.2y. Other users should upgrade to 1.1.1j. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2y (Affected 1.0.2s-1.0.2x). | ||||
| CVE-2020-4778 | 1 Ibm | 1 Curam Social Program Management | 2024-09-17 | 7.5 High |
| IBM Curam Social Program Management 7.0.9 and 7.0.10 uses MD5 algorithm for hashing token in a single instance which less safe than default SHA-256 cryptographic algorithm used throughout the Cúram application. IBM X-Force ID: 189156. | ||||
| CVE-2018-0737 | 3 Canonical, Openssl, Redhat | 4 Ubuntu Linux, Openssl, Enterprise Linux and 1 more | 2024-09-17 | N/A |
| The OpenSSL RSA Key generation algorithm has been shown to be vulnerable to a cache timing side channel attack. An attacker with sufficient access to mount cache timing attacks during the RSA key generation process could recover the private key. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.0i-dev (Affected 1.1.0-1.1.0h). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2p-dev (Affected 1.0.2b-1.0.2o). | ||||
| CVE-2018-5458 | 1 Philips | 1 Intellispace Portal | 2024-09-17 | N/A |
| Philips IntelliSpace Portal all versions of 8.0.x, and 7.0.x have a vulnerability using SSL legacy encryption that could allow an attacker to gain unauthorized access to resources and information. | ||||
| CVE-2017-8191 | 1 Huawei | 1 Fusionsphere Openstack | 2024-09-17 | N/A |
| FusionSphere OpenStack V100R006C00SPC102(NFV)has a week cryptographic algorithm vulnerability. Attackers may exploit the vulnerability to crack the cipher text and cause information leak on the transmission links. | ||||
| CVE-2020-4831 | 1 Ibm | 1 Datapower Gateway | 2024-09-17 | 7.5 High |
| IBM DataPower Gateway 10.0.0.0 through 10.0.1.0 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 189965. | ||||
| CVE-2021-20479 | 1 Ibm | 1 Cloud Pak System | 2024-09-17 | 7.5 High |
| IBM Cloud Pak System 2.3.0 through 2.3.3.3 Interim Fix 1 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 197498. | ||||
| CVE-2021-29794 | 1 Ibm | 1 Tivoli Netcool\/impact | 2024-09-17 | 7.5 High |
| IBM Tivoli Netcool/Impact 7.1.0.20 and 7.1.0.21 uses an insecure SSH server configuration which enables weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 203556. | ||||
| CVE-2017-15998 | 1 Nq | 1 Contacts Backup \& Restore | 2024-09-17 | N/A |
| In the "NQ Contacts Backup & Restore" application 1.1 for Android, DES encryption with a static key is used to secure transmitted contact data. This makes it easier for remote attackers to obtain cleartext information by sniffing the network. | ||||