| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| YesWiki is a wiki system written in PHP. Prior to 4.4.5, the use of a weak cryptographic algorithm and a hard-coded salt to hash the password reset key allows it to be recovered and used to reset the password of any account. This issue is fixed in 4.4.5. |
| Besu Native contains scripts and tooling that is used to build and package the native libraries used by the Ethereum client Hyperledger Besu. Besu 24.7.1 through 25.2.2, corresponding to besu-native versions 0.9.0 through 1.2.1, have a potential consensus bug for the precompiles ALTBN128_ADD (0x06), ALTBN128_MUL (0x07), and ALTBN128_PAIRING (0x08). These precompiles were reimplemented in besu-native using gnark-crypto's bn254 implementation, as the former implementation used a library which was no longer maintained and not sufficiently performant. The new gnark implementation was initially added in version 0.9.0 of besu-native but was not utilized by Besu until version 0.9.2 in Besu 24.7.1. The issue is that there are EC points which may be crafted which are in the correct subgroup but are not on the curve and the besu-native gnark implementation was relying on subgroup checks to perform point-on-curve checks as well. The version of gnark-crypto used at the time did not do this check when performing subgroup checks. The result is that it was possible for Besu to give an incorrect result and fall out of consensus when executing one of these precompiles against a specially crafted input point. Additionally, homogenous Besu-only networks can potentially enshrine invalid state which would be incorrect and difficult to process with patched versions of besu which handle these calls correctly. The underlying defect has been patched in besu-native release 1.3.0. The fixed version of Besu is version 25.3.0. As a workaround for versions of Besu with the problem, the native precompile for altbn128 may be disabled in favor of the pure-java implementation. The pure java implementation is significantly slower, but does not have this consensus issue. |
| Use of hard-coded TLS certificate by default allows an attacker to perform Man-in-the-Middle (MitM) attacks even in the presence of the HTTPS connection. This issue affects: Lanner Inc IAC-AST2500A standard firmware version 1.00.0. |
| Inadequate encryption strength for some Intel(R) PROSet/Wireless WiFi products may allow an unauthenticated user to potentially enable escalation of privilege via adjacent access. |
| Windows Cryptographic Services Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability |
| In Bouncy Castle JCE Provider version 1.55 and earlier the DSA does not fully validate ASN.1 encoding of signature on verification. It is possible to inject extra elements in the sequence making up the signature and still have it validate, which in some cases may allow the introduction of 'invisible' data into a signed structure. |
| In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
keys: Fix overwrite of key expiration on instantiation
The expiry time of a key is unconditionally overwritten during
instantiation, defaulting to turn it permanent. This causes a problem
for DNS resolution as the expiration set by user-space is overwritten to
TIME64_MAX, disabling further DNS updates. Fix this by restoring the
condition that key_set_expiry is only called when the pre-parser sets a
specific expiry. |
| Microsoft Local Security Authority Subsystem Service Information Disclosure Vulnerability |
| Windows Authentication Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability |
| A vulnerability was found in Keycloak. Expired OTP codes are still usable when using FreeOTP when the OTP token period is set to 30 seconds (default). Instead of expiring and deemed unusable around 30 seconds in, the tokens are valid for an additional 30 seconds totaling 1 minute.
A one time passcode that is valid longer than its expiration time increases the attack window for malicious actors to abuse the system and compromise accounts. Additionally, it increases the attack surface because at any given time, two OTPs are valid. |
| The provided HCL Launch Container images contain non-unique HTTPS certificates and a database encryption key. The fix provides directions and tools to replace the non-unique keys and certificates. This does not affect the standard installer packages. |
| The application was signed using a key length less than or equal to 1024 bits, making it potentially vulnerable to forged digital signatures. An attacker could forge the same digital signature of the app after maliciously modifying the app. |
| IBM Concert Software 1.0.0 through 1.0.5 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. |
| An issue was discovered in AudioCodes Mediant Session Border Controller (SBC) before 7.40A.501.841. Due to the use of weak password obfuscation/encryption, an attacker with access to configuration exports (INI) is able to decrypt the passwords. |
| An issue was discovered in AudioCodes One Voice Operations Center (OVOC) before 8.4.582. Due to the use of a hard-coded key, an attacker is able to decrypt sensitive data such as passwords extracted from the topology file. |
| SimpleXMQ before 3.4.0, as used in SimpleX Chat before 4.2, does not apply a key derivation function to intended data, which can interfere with forward secrecy and can have other impacts if there is a compromise of a single private key. This occurs in the X3DH key exchange for the double ratchet protocol. |
| RADIUS Protocol under RFC 2865 is susceptible to forgery attacks by a local attacker who can modify any valid Response (Access-Accept, Access-Reject, or Access-Challenge) to any other response using a chosen-prefix collision attack against MD5 Response Authenticator signature. |
| A vulnerability has been identified in SIPROTEC 5 6MD84 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 6MD85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 6MD85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 6MD86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 6MD86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 6MD89 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 6MU85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7KE85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7KE85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7SA82 (CP100) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SA82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SA84 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SA86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SA86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SA87 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SA87 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SD82 (CP100) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SD82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SD84 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SD86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SD86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SD87 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SD87 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ81 (CP100) (All versions < V8.89), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ81 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ82 (CP100) (All versions < V8.89), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SK82 (CP100) (All versions < V8.89), SIPROTEC 5 7SK82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SK85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SK85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SL82 (CP100) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SL82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SL86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SL86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SL87 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SL87 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SS85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SS85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7ST85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7ST85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7ST86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7SX82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SX85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7UM85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7UT82 (CP100) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7UT82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7UT85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7UT85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7UT86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7UT86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7UT87 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7UT87 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7VE85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7VK87 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7VK87 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7VU85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BA-2EL (Rev.1) (All versions < V9.62 installed on CP150 and CP300 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BA-2EL (Rev.1) (All versions installed on CP200 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BA-2EL (Rev.1) (All versions < V8.89 installed on CP100 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BB-2FO (Rev. 1) (All versions installed on CP200 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BB-2FO (Rev. 1) (All versions < V9.62 installed on CP150 and CP300 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BB-2FO (Rev. 1) (All versions < V8.89 installed on CP100 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BD-2FO (All versions < V9.62), SIPROTEC 5 Compact 7SX800 (CP050) (All versions < V9.64). The affected devices are supporting weak ciphers on several ports (443/tcp for web, 4443/tcp for DIGSI 5 and configurable port for syslog over TLS).
This could allow an unauthorized attacker in a man-in-the-middle position to decrypt any data passed over to and from those ports. |
| IBM CICS TX 11.7 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 229463. |
|
IBM CICS TX 11.1 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 229464.
|
