Vulnerabilities (CVE)

Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2007-6114. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2007-6114. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2007-6114 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usageShow less

Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2007-6118. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2007-6118. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2007-6118 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usageShow less

Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2007-6117. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2007-6117. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2007-6117 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usageShow less

Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2007-6113. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2007-6113, Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2007-6113 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usageShow less

Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2007-6115. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2007-6115. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2007-6115 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usageShow less

Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2007-6114. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2007-6114. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2007-6114 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usageShow less

Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2007-6112. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2007-6112. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2007-6112 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usageShow less

Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2007-5583. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2007-5583. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2007-5583 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usageShow less

Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2008-1382. Reason: This candidate is a reservation duplicate of CVE-2008-1382. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2008-1382 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usageShow less

Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2007-6062. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2007-6062. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2007-6062 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usageShow less

Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2007-6313. Reason: this candidate's description and references were inconsistent and described unrelated, non-security issues. The original intended issue is covered by CVE-2007-6313. Notes: All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usageShow less

Rejected reason: Buffer overflow in the (1) sysfs_show_available_clocksources and (2) sysfs_show_current_clocksources functions in Linux kernel 2.6.23 and earlier might allow local users to cause a denial of service or execute arbitrary code via crafted clock source names. NOTE: follow-on analysis by Linux developers states that "There is no way for unprivileged users (or really even the root user) to add new clocksources.Show less

Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2008-0401. Reason: This candidate is a reservation duplicate of CVE-2008-0401. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2008-0401 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usageShow less

Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2007-6335. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2007-6335. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2007-6335 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usageShow less

Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2007-5956. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2007-5956. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2007-5956 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usageShow less

Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2006-5645. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2006-5645, due to a typo. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2006-5645 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usageShow less

Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2007-5587. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2007-5587. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2007-5587 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usageShow less

Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2007-4158. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2007-4158. It was based on a vague pre-advisory, so the duplicate was not detected until more details were provided. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2007-4158 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usageShow less

Rejected reason: Multiple stack-based buffer overflows in Cisco IOS 12.x and IOS XR allow attackers to execute arbitrary code, as demonstrated via the "Bind Shell", "Reverse Shell", and "Two byte rootshell (Tiny Shell)" attacks. NOTE: the vendor and researcher agree that this issue does not cross privilege boundaries, saying they do not "represent a vulnerability." The disclosure was intended to demonstrate techniques for exploitation, which is not covered by CVEShow less