| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| A vulnerability was found in Satellite. When running a remote execution job on a host, the host's SSH key is not being checked. When the key changes, the Satellite still connects it because it uses "-o StrictHostKeyChecking=no". This flaw can lead to a man-in-the-middle attack (MITM), denial of service, leaking of secrets the remote execution job contains, or other issues that may arise from the attacker's ability to forge an SSH key. This issue does not directly allow unauthorized remote execution on the Satellite, although it can leak secrets that may lead to it. |
| ### Impact
When this library is used to deserialize messagepack data from an untrusted source, there is a risk of a denial of service attack by an attacker that sends data contrived to produce hash collisions, leading to large CPU consumption disproportionate to the size of the data being deserialized.
This is similar to [a prior advisory](https://github.com/MessagePack-CSharp/MessagePack-CSharp/security/advisories/GHSA-7q36-4xx7-xcxf), which provided an inadequate fix for the hash collision part of the vulnerability.
### Patches
The following steps are required to mitigate this risk.
1. Upgrade to a version of the library where a fix is available.
1. Review the steps in [this previous advisory](https://github.com/MessagePack-CSharp/MessagePack-CSharp/security/advisories/GHSA-7q36-4xx7-xcxf) to ensure you have your application configured for untrusted data.
### Workarounds
If upgrading MessagePack to a patched version is not an option for you, you may apply a manual workaround as follows:
1. Declare a class that derives from `MessagePackSecurity`.
2. Override the `GetHashCollisionResistantEqualityComparer<T>` method to provide a collision-resistant hash function of your own and avoid calling `base.GetHashCollisionResistantEqualityComparer<T>()`.
3. Configure a `MessagePackSerializerOptions` with an instance of your derived type by calling `WithSecurity` on an existing options object.
4. Use your custom options object for all deserialization operations. This may be by setting the `MessagePackSerializer.DefaultOptions` static property, if you call methods that rely on this default property, and/or by passing in the options object explicitly to any `Deserialize` method.
### References
- Learn more about best security practices when reading untrusted data with [MessagePack 1.x](https://github.com/MessagePack-CSharp/MessagePack-CSharp/tree/v1.x#security) or [MessagePack 2.x](https://github.com/MessagePack-CSharp/MessagePack-CSharp#security).
- The .NET team's [discussion on hash collision vulnerabilities of their `HashCode` struct](https://github.com/GrabYourPitchforks/runtime/blob/threat_models/docs/design/security/System.HashCode.md).
### For more information
If you have any questions or comments about this advisory:
* [Start a public discussion](https://github.com/MessagePack-CSharp/MessagePack-CSharp/discussions)
* [Email us privately](mailto:andrewarnott@live.com) |
| 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 < V8.90), 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 < V8.90), 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 < V8.90), 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 < V8.90), 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. |
| php-censor v2.1.4 and fixed in v.2.1.5 was discovered to utilize a weak hashing algorithm for its remember_key value. This allows attackers to bruteforce to bruteforce the remember_key value to gain access to accounts that have checked "remember me" when logging in. |
| HCL DRYiCE Optibot Reset Station is impacted by insecure encryption of One-Time Passwords (OTPs). This could allow an attacker with access to the database to recover some or all encrypted values. |
| HCL DRYiCE Optibot Reset Station is impacted by insecure encryption of security questions. This could allow an attacker with access to the database to recover some or all encrypted values. |
| VyOS 1.3 through 1.5 (fixed in 1.4.2) or any Debian-based system using dropbear in combination with live-build has the same Dropbear private host keys across different installations. Thus, an attacker can conduct active man-in-the-middle attacks against SSH connections if Dropbear is enabled as the SSH daemon. I n VyOS, this is not the default configuration for the system SSH daemon, but is for the console service. To mitigate this, one can run "rm -f /etc/dropbear/*key*" and/or "rm -f /etc/dropbear-initramfs/*key*" and then dropbearkey -t rsa -s 4096 -f /etc/dropbear_rsa_host_key and reload the service or reboot the system before using Dropbear as the SSH daemon (this clears out all keys mistakenly built into the release image) or update to the latest version of VyOS 1.4 or 1.5. Note that this vulnerability is not unique to VyOS and may appear in any Debian-based Linux distribution that uses Dropbear in combination with live-build, which has a safeguard against this behavior in OpenSSH but no equivalent one for Dropbear. |
| Cryptographic Flaw in PDFium in Google Chrome prior to 147.0.7727.55 allowed an attacker to read potentially sensitive information from encrypted PDFs via a brute-force attack. (Chromium security severity: Medium) |
| Configured cipher preference order not preserved vulnerability in Apache Tomcat.
This issue affects Apache Tomcat: from 11.0.16 through 11.0.18, from 10.1.51 through 10.1.52, from 9.0.114 through 9.0.115.
Users are recommended to upgrade to version 11.0.20, 10.1.53 or 9.0.116, which fix the issue. |
| A Key Exchange without Entity Authentication vulnerability in the SSH implementation of Juniper Networks Apstra allows a unauthenticated, MITM
attacker to impersonate managed devices.
Due to insufficient SSH host key validation an attacker can perform a machine-in-the-middle attack on the SSH connections from Apstra to managed devices, enabling an attacker to impersonate a managed device and capture user credentials.
This issue affects all versions of Apstra before 6.1.1. |
| The 802.11 standard that underpins Wi-Fi Protected Access (WPA, WPA2, and WPA3) and Wired Equivalent Privacy (WEP) doesn't require that the A-MSDU flag in the plaintext QoS header field is authenticated. Against devices that support receiving non-SSP A-MSDU frames (which is mandatory as part of 802.11n), an adversary can abuse this to inject arbitrary network packets. |
| Cocos AI is a confidential computing system for AI. The current implementation of attested TLS (aTLS) in CoCoS is vulnerable to a relay attack affecting all versions from v0.4.0 through v0.8.2. This vulnerability is present in both the AMD SEV-SNP and Intel TDX deployment targets supported by CoCoS. In the affected design, an attacker may be able to extract the ephemeral TLS private key used during the intra-handshake attestation. Because the attestation evidence is bound to the ephemeral key but not to the TLS channel, possession of that key is sufficient to relay or divert the attested TLS session. A client will accept the connection under false assumptions about the endpoint it is communicating with — the attestation report cannot distinguish the genuine attested service from the attacker's relay. This undermines the intended authentication guarantees of attested TLS. A successful attack may allow an attacker to impersonate an attested CoCoS service and access data or operations that the client intended to send only to the genuine attested endpoint. Exploitation requires the attacker to first extract the ephemeral TLS private key, which is possible through physical access to the server hardware, transient execution attacks, or side-channel attacks. Note that the aTLS implementation was fully redesigned in v0.7.0, but the redesign does not address this vulnerability. The relay attack weakness is architectural and affects all releases in the v0.4.0–v0.8.2 range. This vulnerability class was formally analyzed and demonstrated across multiple attested TLS implementations, including CoCoS, by researchers whose findings were disclosed to the IETF TLS Working Group. Formal verification was conducted using ProVerif. As of time of publication, there is no patch available. No complete workaround is available. The following hardening measures reduce but do not eliminate the risk: Keep TEE firmware and microcode up to date to reduce the key-extraction surface; define strict attestation policies that validate all available report fields, including firmware versions, TCB levels, and platform configuration registers; and/or enable mutual aTLS with CA-signed certificates where deployment architecture permits. |
| OrangeHRM is a comprehensive human resource management (HRM) system. From 5.0 to 5.8, OrangeHRM Open Source encrypts certain sensitive fields with AES in ECB mode, which preserves block-aligned plaintext patterns in ciphertext and enables pattern disclosure against stored data. This vulnerability is fixed in 5.8.1. |
| SimpleJWT is a simple JSON web token library written in PHP. Prior to version 1.1.1, an unauthenticated attacker can perform a Denial of Service via JWE header tampering when PBES2 algorithms are used. Applications that call JWE::decrypt() on attacker-controlled JWEs using PBES2 algorithms are affected. This issue has been patched in version 1.1.1. |
| The Semtech LR11xx LoRa transceivers implement secure boot functionality using digital signatures to authenticate firmware. However, the implementation uses a non-standard cryptographic hashing algorithm that is vulnerable to second preimage attacks. An attacker with physical access to the device can exploit this weakness to generate a malicious firmware image with a hash collision, bypassing the secure boot verification mechanism and installing arbitrary unauthorized firmware on the device. |
| The Video Conferencing with Zoom plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Sensitive Information Exposure due to hardcoded encryption key on the 'vczapi_encrypt_decrypt' function in versions up to, and including, 4.2.1. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to decrypt and view the meeting id and password. |
| The EmbedPress plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Sensitive Information Exposure due to hardcoded encryption key on the 'lock_content_form_handler' and 'display_password_form' function in versions up to, and including, 3.7.3. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to decrypt and view the password protected content. |
| The Appointment Hour Booking plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to CAPTCHA bypass in versions up to, and including, 1.3.72. This is due to the use of insufficiently strong hashing algorithm on the CAPTCHA secret that is also displayed to the user via a cookie. |
| The ProfileGrid plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to unauthorized decryption of private information in versions up to, and including, 5.5.0. This is due to the passphrase and iv being hardcoded in the 'pm_encrypt_decrypt_pass' function and used across all sites running the plugin. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with administrator-level permissions or above to decrypt and view users' passwords. If combined with another vulnerability, this can potentially grant lower-privileged users access to users' passwords. |
| The Civi - Job Board & Freelance Marketplace WordPress Theme plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Sensitive Information Exposure in all versions up to, and including, 2.1.4 via hard-coded credentials. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to extract sensitive data including LinkedIn client and secret keys. |
