GNOME Geary before 3.36.3 mishandles pinned TLS certificate verification for IMAP and SMTP services using invalid TLS certificates (e.g., self-signed certificates) when the client system is not configured to use a system...Show moreGNOME Geary before 3.36.3 mishandles pinned TLS certificate verification for IMAP and SMTP services using invalid TLS certificates (e.g., self-signed certificates) when the client system is not configured to use a system-provided PKCS#11 store. This allows a meddler in the middle to present a different invalid certificate to intercept incoming and outgoing mail.Show less |
In versions 15.0.0-15.1.0.1, 14.1.0-14.1.2.3, 13.1.0-13.1.3.4, 12.1.0-12.1.5.1, and 11.6.1-11.6.5.2, the BIG-IP Client or Server SSL profile ignores revoked certificates, even when a valid CRL is present. This impacts SS...Show moreIn versions 15.0.0-15.1.0.1, 14.1.0-14.1.2.3, 13.1.0-13.1.3.4, 12.1.0-12.1.5.1, and 11.6.1-11.6.5.2, the BIG-IP Client or Server SSL profile ignores revoked certificates, even when a valid CRL is present. This impacts SSL/TLS connections and may result in a man-in-the-middle attack on the connections.Show less |
Enterprise Access Client Auto-Updater allows for Remote Code Execution prior to version 2.0.1. |
An issue was discovered on ASUS RT-AC1900P routers before 3.0.0.4.385_20253. The router accepts an arbitrary server certificate for a firmware update. The culprit is the --no-check-certificate option passed to wget tool...Show moreAn issue was discovered on ASUS RT-AC1900P routers before 3.0.0.4.385_20253. The router accepts an arbitrary server certificate for a firmware update. The culprit is the --no-check-certificate option passed to wget tool used to download firmware update files.Show less |
An issue was discovered in Octopus Deploy 3.4. A deployment target can be configured with an Account or Certificate that is outside the scope of the deployment target. An authorised user can potentially use a certificate...Show moreAn issue was discovered in Octopus Deploy 3.4. A deployment target can be configured with an Account or Certificate that is outside the scope of the deployment target. An authorised user can potentially use a certificate that they are not in scope to use. An authorised user is also able to obtain certificate metadata by associating a certificate with certain resources that should fail scope validation.Show less |
wolfSSL before 4.5.0 mishandles TLS 1.3 server data in the WAIT_CERT_CR state, within SanityCheckTls13MsgReceived() in tls13.c. This is an incorrect implementation of the TLS 1.3 client state machine. This allows attacke...Show morewolfSSL before 4.5.0 mishandles TLS 1.3 server data in the WAIT_CERT_CR state, within SanityCheckTls13MsgReceived() in tls13.c. This is an incorrect implementation of the TLS 1.3 client state machine. This allows attackers in a privileged network position to completely impersonate any TLS 1.3 servers, and read or modify potentially sensitive information between clients using the wolfSSL library and these TLS servers.Show less |
An issue was discovered in NLnet Labs Routinator 0.1.0 through 0.7.1. It allows remote attackers to bypass intended access restrictions or to cause a denial of service on dependent routing systems by strategically withho...Show moreAn issue was discovered in NLnet Labs Routinator 0.1.0 through 0.7.1. It allows remote attackers to bypass intended access restrictions or to cause a denial of service on dependent routing systems by strategically withholding RPKI Route Origin Authorisation ".roa" files or X509 Certificate Revocation List files from the RPKI relying party's view.Show less |
Faye before version 1.4.0, there is a lack of certification validation in TLS handshakes. Faye uses em-http-request and faye-websocket in the Ruby version of its client. Those libraries both use the `EM::Connection#start...Show moreFaye before version 1.4.0, there is a lack of certification validation in TLS handshakes. Faye uses em-http-request and faye-websocket in the Ruby version of its client. Those libraries both use the `EM::Connection#start_tls` method in EventMachine to implement the TLS handshake whenever a `wss:` URL is used for the connection. This method does not implement certificate verification by default, meaning that it does not check that the server presents a valid and trusted TLS certificate for the expected hostname. That means that any `https:` or `wss:` connection made using these libraries is vulnerable to a man-in-the-middle attack, since it does not confirm the identity of the server it is connected to. The first request a Faye client makes is always sent via normal HTTP, but later messages may be sent via WebSocket. Therefore it is vulnerable to the same problem that these underlying libraries are, and we needed both libraries to support TLS verification before Faye could claim to do the same. Your client would still be insecure if its initial HTTPS request was verified, but later WebSocket connections were not. This is fixed in Faye v1.4.0, which enables verification by default. For further background information on this issue, please see the referenced GitHub Advisory.Show less |
In faye-websocket before version 0.11.0, there is a lack of certification validation in TLS handshakes. The `Faye::WebSocket::Client` class uses the `EM::Connection#start_tls` method in EventMachine to implement the TLS...Show moreIn faye-websocket before version 0.11.0, there is a lack of certification validation in TLS handshakes. The `Faye::WebSocket::Client` class uses the `EM::Connection#start_tls` method in EventMachine to implement the TLS handshake whenever a `wss:` URL is used for the connection. This method does not implement certificate verification by default, meaning that it does not check that the server presents a valid and trusted TLS certificate for the expected hostname. That means that any `wss:` connection made using this library is vulnerable to a man-in-the-middle attack, since it does not confirm the identity of the server it is connected to. For further background information on this issue, please see the referenced GitHub Advisory. Upgrading `faye-websocket` to v0.11.0 is recommended.Show less |
An issue was discovered in RIPE NCC RPKI Validator 3.x through 3.1-2020.07.06.14.28. It allows remote attackers to bypass intended access restrictions or to cause a denial of service on dependent routing systems by strat...Show moreAn issue was discovered in RIPE NCC RPKI Validator 3.x through 3.1-2020.07.06.14.28. It allows remote attackers to bypass intended access restrictions or to cause a denial of service on dependent routing systems by strategically withholding RPKI Route Origin Authorisation ".roa" files or X509 Certificate Revocation List files from the RPKI relying party's view. NOTE: some third parties may regard this as a preferred behavior, not a vulnerabilityShow less |
An issue was discovered in RIPE NCC RPKI Validator 3.x before 3.1-2020.07.06.14.28. RRDP fetches proceed even with a lack of validation of a TLS HTTPS endpoint. This allows remote attackers to bypass intended access rest...Show moreAn issue was discovered in RIPE NCC RPKI Validator 3.x before 3.1-2020.07.06.14.28. RRDP fetches proceed even with a lack of validation of a TLS HTTPS endpoint. This allows remote attackers to bypass intended access restrictions, or to trigger denial of service to traffic directed to co-dependent routing systems. NOTE: third parties assert that the behavior is intentionally permitted by RFC 8182Show less |
An issue was discovered in RIPE NCC RPKI Validator 3.x through 3.1-2020.07.06.14.28. Missing validation checks on CRL presence or CRL staleness in the X509-based RPKI certificate-tree validation procedure allow remote at...Show moreAn issue was discovered in RIPE NCC RPKI Validator 3.x through 3.1-2020.07.06.14.28. Missing validation checks on CRL presence or CRL staleness in the X509-based RPKI certificate-tree validation procedure allow remote attackers to bypass intended access restrictions by using revoked certificates. NOTE: there may be counterarguments related to backwards compatibilityShow less |
This vulnerability allows network-adjacent attackers to compromise the integrity of downloaded information on affected installations of NETGEAR R6700 V1.0.4.84_10.0.58 routers. Authentication is not required to exploit t...Show moreThis vulnerability allows network-adjacent attackers to compromise the integrity of downloaded information on affected installations of NETGEAR R6700 V1.0.4.84_10.0.58 routers. Authentication is not required to exploit this vulnerability. The specific flaw exists within the downloading of files via HTTPS. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of the certificate presented by the server. An attacker can leverage this in conjunction with other vulnerabilities to execute arbitrary code in the context of root. Was ZDI-CAN-9647.Show less |
Inappropriate implementation in WebRTC in Google Chrome prior to 84.0.4147.89 allowed an attacker in a privileged network position to leak cross-origin data via a crafted HTML page. |
HPE has found a potential Remote Access Restriction Bypass in HPE MSE Msg Gw application E-LTU prior to version 3.2 when HTTPS is used between the USSD and an external USSD service logic application. Update to version 3....Show moreHPE has found a potential Remote Access Restriction Bypass in HPE MSE Msg Gw application E-LTU prior to version 3.2 when HTTPS is used between the USSD and an external USSD service logic application. Update to version 3.2 and update the HTTPS configuration as described in the HPE MSE Messaging Gateway Configuration and Operations Guide.Show less |
Graylog before 3.3.3 lacks SSL Certificate Validation for LDAP servers. It allows use of an external user/group database stored in LDAP. The connection configuration allows the usage of unencrypted, SSL- or TLS-secured c...Show moreGraylog before 3.3.3 lacks SSL Certificate Validation for LDAP servers. It allows use of an external user/group database stored in LDAP. The connection configuration allows the usage of unencrypted, SSL- or TLS-secured connections. Unfortunately, the Graylog client code (in all versions that support LDAP) does not implement proper certificate validation (regardless of whether the "Allow self-signed certificates" option is used). Therefore, any attacker with the ability to intercept network traffic between a Graylog server and an LDAP server is able to redirect traffic to a different LDAP server (unnoticed by the Graylog server due to the lack of certificate validation), effectively bypassing Graylog's authentication mechanism.Show less |
In Go before 1.13.13 and 1.14.x before 1.14.5, Certificate.Verify may lack a check on the VerifyOptions.KeyUsages EKU requirements (if VerifyOptions.Roots equals nil and the installation is on Windows). Thus, X.509 certi...Show moreIn Go before 1.13.13 and 1.14.x before 1.14.5, Certificate.Verify may lack a check on the VerifyOptions.KeyUsages EKU requirements (if VerifyOptions.Roots equals nil and the installation is on Windows). Thus, X.509 certificate verification is incomplete.Show less |
In Dogtag PKI through 10.8.3, the pki.client.PKIConnection class did not enable python-requests certificate validation. Since the verify parameter was hard-coded in all request functions, it was not possible to override...Show moreIn Dogtag PKI through 10.8.3, the pki.client.PKIConnection class did not enable python-requests certificate validation. Since the verify parameter was hard-coded in all request functions, it was not possible to override the setting. As a result, tools making use of this class, such as the pki-server command, may have been vulnerable to Person-in-the-Middle attacks in certain non-localhost use cases. This is fixed in 10.9.0-b1.Show less |
libldap in certain third-party OpenLDAP packages has a certificate-validation flaw when the third-party package is asserting RFC6125 support. It considers CN even when there is a non-matching subjectAltName (SAN). This i...Show morelibldap in certain third-party OpenLDAP packages has a certificate-validation flaw when the third-party package is asserting RFC6125 support. It considers CN even when there is a non-matching subjectAltName (SAN). This is fixed in, for example, openldap-2.4.46-10.el8 in Red Hat Enterprise Linux.Show less |
In Redgate SQL Monitor 7.1.4 through 10.1.6 (inclusive), the scope for disabling some TLS security certificate checks can extend beyond that defined by various options on the Configuration > Notifications pages to disabl...Show moreIn Redgate SQL Monitor 7.1.4 through 10.1.6 (inclusive), the scope for disabling some TLS security certificate checks can extend beyond that defined by various options on the Configuration > Notifications pages to disable certificate checking for alert notifications. These TLS security checks are also ignored during monitoring of VMware machines. This would make SQL Monitor vulnerable to potential man-in-the-middle attacks when sending alert notification emails, posting to Slack or posting to webhooks. The vulnerability is fixed in version 10.1.7.Show less |