Use of Cryptographically Weak Pseudo-Random Number Generator (PRNG)

Use of Cryptographically Weak Pseudo-Random Number Generator (PRNG) in the SonicOS SSLVPN authentication token generator that, in certain cases, can be predicted by an attacker potentially resulting in authentication bypass.Show less

Guzzle OAuth Subscriber signs Guzzle requests using OAuth 1.0. Prior to 0.8.1, Nonce generation does not use sufficient entropy nor a cryptographically secure pseudorandom source. This can leave servers vulnerable to replay attacks when TLS is not used. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.8.1.Show less

Use of cryptographically weak pseudo-random number generator (PRNG) vulnerability in the SonicWall SMA100 SSLVPN backup code generator that, in certain cases, can be predicted by an attacker, potentially exposing the generated secret.Show less

The Migration, Backup, Staging WordPress plugin before 0.9.106 does not use sufficient randomness in the filename that is created when generating a backup, which could be bruteforced by attackers to leak sensitive information about said backups.Show less

The goTenna Pro App does not use SecureRandom when generating passwords for sharing cryptographic keys. The random function in use makes it easier for attackers to brute force this password if the broadcasted encryption key is captured over RF. This only applies to the optional broadcast of an encryption key, so it is advised to share the key with local QR code for higher security operations.Show less

The goTenna Pro ATAK Plugin does not use SecureRandom when generating passwords for sharing cryptographic keys. The random function in use makes it easier for attackers to brute force this password if the broadcasted encryption key is captured over RF. This only applies to the optional broadcast of an encryption key, so it is advised to share the key with local QR code for higher security operations.Show less

Generation of weak and predictable Initialization Vector (IV) in PMFW (Power Management Firmware) may allow an attacker with privileges to reuse IV values to reverse-engineer debug data, potentially resulting in information disclosure.Show less

CodiMD allows realtime collaborative markdown notes on all platforms. CodiMD before 2.5.4 is missing authentication and access control vulnerability allowing an unauthenticated attacker to gain unauthorised access to image data uploaded to CodiMD. CodiMD does not require valid authentication to access uploaded images or to upload new image data. An attacker who can determine an uploaded image's URL can gain unauthorised access to uploaded image data. Due to the insecure random filename generation in the underlying Formidable library, an attacker can determine the filenames for previously uploaded images and the likelihood of this issue being exploited is increased. This vulnerability is fixed in 2.5.4. Show less

Use of Cryptographically Weak Pseudo-Random Number Generator (PRNG) vulnerability in Apache StreamPipes user self-registration and password recovery mechanism. This allows an attacker to guess the recovery token in a reasonable time and thereby to take over the attacked user's account. This issue affects Apache StreamPipes: from 0.69.0 through 0.93.0. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 0.95.0, which fixes the issue. Show less

In PuTTY 0.68 through 0.80 before 0.81, biased ECDSA nonce generation allows an attacker to recover a user's NIST P-521 secret key via a quick attack in approximately 60 signatures. This is especially important in a scenario where an adversary is able to read messages signed by PuTTY or Pageant. The required set of signed messages may be publicly readable because they are stored in a public Git service that supports use of SSH for commit signing, and the signatures were made by Pageant through an agent-forwarding mechanism. In other words, an adversary may already have enough signature information to compromise a victim's private key, even if there is no further use of vulnerable PuTTY versions. After a key compromise, an adversary may be able to conduct supply-chain attacks on software maintained in Git. A second, independent scenario is that the adversary is an operator of an SSH server to which the victim authenticates (for remote login or file copy), even though this server is not fully trusted by the victim, and the victim uses the same private key for SSH connections to other services operated by other entities. Here, the rogue server operator (who would otherwise have no way to determine the victim's private key) can derive the victim's private key, and then use it for unauthorized access to those other services. If the other services include Git services, then again it may be possible to conduct supply-chain attacks on software maintained in Git. This also affects, for example, FileZilla before 3.67.0, WinSCP before 6.3.3, TortoiseGit before 2.15.0.1, and TortoiseSVN through 1.14.6.Show less