| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| curl 7.61.0 through 7.76.1 suffers from exposure of data element to wrong session due to a mistake in the code for CURLOPT_SSL_CIPHER_LIST when libcurl is built to use the Schannel TLS library. The selected cipher set was stored in a single "static" variable in the library, which has the surprising side-effect that if an application sets up multiple concurrent transfers, the last one that sets the ciphers will accidentally control the set used by all transfers. In a worst-case scenario, this weakens transport security significantly. |
| curl 7.63.0 to and including 7.75.0 includes vulnerability that allows a malicious HTTPS proxy to MITM a connection due to bad handling of TLS 1.3 session tickets. When using a HTTPS proxy and TLS 1.3, libcurl can confuse session tickets arriving from the HTTPS proxy but work as if they arrived from the remote server and then wrongly "short-cut" the host handshake. When confusing the tickets, a HTTPS proxy can trick libcurl to use the wrong session ticket resume for the host and thereby circumvent the server TLS certificate check and make a MITM attack to be possible to perform unnoticed. Note that such a malicious HTTPS proxy needs to provide a certificate that curl will accept for the MITMed server for an attack to work - unless curl has been told to ignore the server certificate check. |
| curl 7.1.1 to and including 7.75.0 is vulnerable to an "Exposure of Private Personal Information to an Unauthorized Actor" by leaking credentials in the HTTP Referer: header. libcurl does not strip off user credentials from the URL when automatically populating the Referer: HTTP request header field in outgoing HTTP requests, and therefore risks leaking sensitive data to the server that is the target of the second HTTP request. |
| There's a flaw in lz4. An attacker who submits a crafted file to an application linked with lz4 may be able to trigger an integer overflow, leading to calling of memmove() on a negative size argument, causing an out-of-bounds write and/or a crash. The greatest impact of this flaw is to availability, with some potential impact to confidentiality and integrity as well. |
| curl 7.41.0 through 7.73.0 is vulnerable to an improper check for certificate revocation due to insufficient verification of the OCSP response. |
| curl 7.21.0 to and including 7.73.0 is vulnerable to uncontrolled recursion due to a stack overflow issue in FTP wildcard match parsing. |
| A malicious server can use the FTP PASV response to trick curl 7.73.0 and earlier into connecting back to a given IP address and port, and this way potentially make curl extract information about services that are otherwise private and not disclosed, for example doing port scanning and service banner extractions. |
| curl 7.20.0 through 7.70.0 is vulnerable to improper restriction of names for files and other resources that can lead too overwriting a local file when the -J flag is used. |
| In Splunk MCP Server versions below 1.2.1, Splunk MCP Server could send the Splunk platform authentication token of a user who runs a custom Application Programming Interface (API) tool to the URL configured for that tool. If another user controls that URL, they could capture the token and use it to access data and perform actions as the user who ran the tool. Successful exploitation requires a user who holds a role that contains the mcp_tool_execute capability to run a custom API tool configured by another user. For more information see Configure the Splunk MCP Server (https://help.splunk.com/en/splunk-enterprise/mcp-server-for-splunk-platform/1.2/configure-the-splunk-mcp-server) and Managing custom tools in Splunk MCP Server (https://help.splunk.com/en/splunk-enterprise/mcp-server-for-splunk-platform/1.2/managing-custom-tools-in-splunk-mcp-server) in the Splunk documentation. |
| libpcre in PCRE before 8.43 allows a subject buffer over-read in JIT when UTF is disabled, and \X or \R has more than one fixed quantifier, a related issue to CVE-2019-20454. |
| In libarchive before 3.6.2, the software does not check for an error after calling calloc function that can return with a NULL pointer if the function fails, which leads to a resultant NULL pointer dereference. NOTE: the discoverer cites this CWE-476 remark but third parties dispute the code-execution impact: "In rare circumstances, when NULL is equivalent to the 0x0 memory address and privileged code can access it, then writing or reading memory is possible, which may lead to code execution." |
| libpcre in PCRE before 8.44 allows an integer overflow via a large number after a (?C substring. |
| In Splunk SOAR versions below 8.6.0, an unauthenticated user could spoof the source IP address in a crafted request to an Automation Broker notification endpoint and execute arbitrary code on the Splunk SOAR host. The vulnerability is possible because the Splunk SOAR Automation Broker trusts a client-supplied source IP address header as proof that the request originates from the local system. Successful exploitation can expose all relevant data, affect system integrity, and disrupt service availability. For more information see About Splunk SOAR Automation Broker (https://help.splunk.com/en/splunk-soar/splunk-automation-broker/about-splunk-soar-automation-broker/about-splunk-soar-automation-broker) in the Splunk documentation. |
| In Splunk Enterprise versions below 10.4.2, 10.2.6, 10.0.9, and 9.4.14, an unauthenticated user who has access to a trusted distributed search private key could forge an administrative session token, access all relevant data, affect system integrity, and disrupt service availability. The vulnerability is possible because the distributed search authentication token endpoint does not require a signed request to identify a configured search peer, allowing the request to fall back to shared local key material. For more information see About distributed search (https://help.splunk.com/en/splunk-enterprise/administer/distributed-search/10.4/overview-of-distributed-search/about-distributed-search) and authentication.conf (https://help.splunk.com/en/splunk-enterprise/administer/admin-manual/10.4/configuration-file-reference/10.4.2-configuration-file-reference/authentication.conf) in Splunk documentation. |
| In Splunk Enterprise versions below 10.4.2, 10.2.6, 10.0.9, and 9.4.14, an authenticated user who does not hold a role with the edit_manager_xml capability could write a malicious Splunk Web Manager Extensible Markup Language (XML) configuration. When the same user opens the affected Splunk Web Manager page, Splunk Enterprise runs attacker-controlled operating-system commands as the user account running Splunk Enterprise. The vulnerability is possible because Splunk Web does not require the edit_manager_xml capability before accepting Splunk Web Manager XML configuration changes. |
| In Splunk Enterprise versions below 10.4.2, 10.2.6, 10.0.9, and 9.4.14, a user who holds the "power" Splunk role could store a Dashboard Studio workflow action containing attacker-controlled Search Processing Language (SPL). When another authenticated user selects the action from Event Actions and selects Continue, Splunk Enterprise runs the injected SPL using the permissions of that user. The injected SPL could access or modify data available to that user. The vulnerability is possible because Dashboard Studio does not sufficiently validate workflow-action URLs before submitting requests. The vulnerability requires the attacker to phish the affected user by tricking them into initiating a request within their browser. The user who holds the "power" Splunk role should not be able to exploit the vulnerability at will. |
| In Splunk Enterprise versions below 10.4.2, 10.2.6, 10.0.9, and 9.4.14, an unauthenticated user could trick an authenticated user into opening a crafted link to Analytics Workspace. When the authenticated user opens the link, Splunk Enterprise runs attacker-controlled Search Processing Language (SPL) using the permissions of that user. The injected SPL could access data and perform actions available to that user. The vulnerability is possible because Analytics Workspace does not sufficiently validate data used to build searches. The vulnerability requires the attacker to phish the user by tricking them into opening the crafted link. The unauthenticated user should not be able to exploit the vulnerability at will. |
| In Splunk Enterprise versions below 10.4.2, 10.2.6, 10.0.9, and 9.4.14, a user who does not hold the "admin" or "power" Splunk roles could inject Search Processing Language (SPL) into saved-search dispatch requests. This could allow for unauthorized access to all relevant data and affect system integrity within Splunk Enterprise. The vulnerability is possible because Splunk Enterprise does not correctly validate caller-supplied time values before using them in saved-search dispatch. For more information see Search endpoint descriptions (https://help.splunk.com/en/splunk-enterprise/rest-api-reference/10.2/search-endpoints/search-endpoint-descriptions) in the Splunk documentation. |
| In Splunk Enterprise versions below 10.4.2, 10.2.6, 10.0.9, and 9.4.14, an unauthenticated user could trick an authenticated user into opening a crafted link to Monitoring Console. When the authenticated user opens the link, Splunk Enterprise runs attacker-controlled Search Processing Language (SPL) using the permissions of that user. The injected SPL could access data and perform actions available to that user. The vulnerability is possible because Monitoring Console does not sufficiently validate data used to build forwarder dashboard searches. The vulnerability requires the attacker to phish the user by tricking them into opening the crafted link. The unauthenticated user should not be able to exploit the vulnerability at will. |
| In Splunk Enterprise versions below 10.4.1, 10.2.6, 10.0.9, and 9.4.14, a user who holds the "power" Splunk role could store attacker-controlled Search Processing Language (SPL) in a dashboard. When another authenticated user exports the dashboard as a Portable Document Format (PDF) file, Splunk Enterprise runs the injected SPL using the permissions of that user. The injected SPL could access or modify data available to that user. The vulnerability is possible because Splunk Web does not sufficiently validate dashboard content before processing PDF exports. The vulnerability requires the attacker to phish the affected user by tricking them into initiating a request within their browser. The user who holds the "power" Splunk role should not be able to exploit the vulnerability at will. For more information see Generate PDFs of your reports and dashboards (https://help.splunk.com/en/splunk-enterprise/create-dashboards-and-reports/reporting-manual/9.4/report-management/generate-pdfs-of-your-reports-and-dashboards) in the Splunk documentation. |
