A vulnerability in the interprocess communication (IPC) channel of Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for Windows could allow an authenticated, local attacker to perform a DLL hijacking attack on an affected device...Show moreA vulnerability in the interprocess communication (IPC) channel of Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client for Windows could allow an authenticated, local attacker to perform a DLL hijacking attack on an affected device if the VPN Posture (HostScan) Module is installed on the AnyConnect client. This vulnerability is due to insufficient validation of resources that are loaded by the application at run time. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending a crafted IPC message to the AnyConnect process. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to execute arbitrary code on the affected machine with SYSTEM privileges. To exploit this vulnerability, the attacker needs valid credentials on the Windows system.Show less |
An improper verification of cryptographic signature vulnerability exists in the Palo Alto Networks Prisma Cloud Compute console. This vulnerability enables an attacker to bypass signature validation during SAML authentic...Show moreAn improper verification of cryptographic signature vulnerability exists in the Palo Alto Networks Prisma Cloud Compute console. This vulnerability enables an attacker to bypass signature validation during SAML authentication by logging in to the Prisma Cloud Compute console as any authorized user. This issue impacts: All versions of Prisma Cloud Compute 19.11, Prisma Cloud Compute 20.04, and Prisma Cloud Compute 20.09; Prisma Cloud Compute 20.12 before update 1. Prisma Cloud Compute SaaS version is not impacted by this vulnerability.Show less |
Multiple vulnerabilities in Cisco Network Convergence System (NCS) 540 Series Routers, only when running Cisco IOS XR NCS540L software images, and Cisco IOS XR Software for the Cisco 8000 Series Routers could allow an au...Show moreMultiple vulnerabilities in Cisco Network Convergence System (NCS) 540 Series Routers, only when running Cisco IOS XR NCS540L software images, and Cisco IOS XR Software for the Cisco 8000 Series Routers could allow an authenticated, local attacker to execute unsigned code during the boot process on an affected device. For more information about these vulnerabilities, see the Details section of this advisory.Show less |
Multiple vulnerabilities in Cisco Network Convergence System (NCS) 540 Series Routers, only when running Cisco IOS XR NCS540L software images, and Cisco IOS XR Software for the Cisco 8000 Series Routers could allow an au...Show moreMultiple vulnerabilities in Cisco Network Convergence System (NCS) 540 Series Routers, only when running Cisco IOS XR NCS540L software images, and Cisco IOS XR Software for the Cisco 8000 Series Routers could allow an authenticated, local attacker to execute unsigned code during the boot process on an affected device. For more information about these vulnerabilities, see the Details section of this advisory.Show less |
Bash injection vulnerability and bypass of signature verification in Rostelecom CS-C2SHW 5.0.082.1. The camera reads firmware update configuration from SD card file vc\version.json. fw-sign parameter and from this config...Show moreBash injection vulnerability and bypass of signature verification in Rostelecom CS-C2SHW 5.0.082.1. The camera reads firmware update configuration from SD card file vc\version.json. fw-sign parameter and from this configuration is directly inserted into a bash command. Firmware update is run automatically if there is special file on the inserted SD card.Show less |
PySAML2 is a pure python implementation of SAML Version 2 Standard. PySAML2 before 6.5.0 has an improper verification of cryptographic signature vulnerability. Users of pysaml2 that use the default CryptoBackendXmlSec1 b...Show morePySAML2 is a pure python implementation of SAML Version 2 Standard. PySAML2 before 6.5.0 has an improper verification of cryptographic signature vulnerability. Users of pysaml2 that use the default CryptoBackendXmlSec1 backend and need to verify signed SAML documents are impacted. PySAML2 does not ensure that a signed SAML document is correctly signed. The default CryptoBackendXmlSec1 backend is using the xmlsec1 binary to verify the signature of signed SAML documents, but by default xmlsec1 accepts any type of key found within the given document. xmlsec1 needs to be configured explicitly to only use only _x509 certificates_ for the verification process of the SAML document signature. This is fixed in PySAML2 6.5.0.Show less |
PySAML2 is a pure python implementation of SAML Version 2 Standard. PySAML2 before 6.5.0 has an improper verification of cryptographic signature vulnerability. All users of pysaml2 that need to validate signed SAML docum...Show morePySAML2 is a pure python implementation of SAML Version 2 Standard. PySAML2 before 6.5.0 has an improper verification of cryptographic signature vulnerability. All users of pysaml2 that need to validate signed SAML documents are impacted. The vulnerability is a variant of XML Signature wrapping because it did not validate the SAML document against an XML schema. This allowed invalid XML documents to be processed and such a document can trick pysaml2 with a wrapped signature. This is fixed in PySAML2 6.5.0.Show less |
The Portable Document Format (PDF) specification does not provide any information regarding the concrete procedure of how to validate signatures. Consequently, a Signature Wrapping vulnerability exists in multiple produc...Show moreThe Portable Document Format (PDF) specification does not provide any information regarding the concrete procedure of how to validate signatures. Consequently, a Signature Wrapping vulnerability exists in multiple products. An attacker can use /ByteRange and xref manipulations that are not detected by the signature-validation logic. This affects Foxit Reader before 9.4 and PhantomPDF before 8.3.9 and 9.x before 9.4. It also affects eXpert PDF 12 Ultimate, Expert PDF Reader, Nitro Pro, Nitro Reader, PDF Architect 6, PDF Editor 6 Pro, PDF Experte 9 Ultimate, PDFelement6 Pro, PDF Studio Viewer 2018, PDF Studio Pro, PDF-XChange Editor and Viewer, Perfect PDF 10 Premium, Perfect PDF Reader, Soda PDF, and Soda PDF Desktop.Show less |
The Portable Document Format (PDF) specification does not provide any information regarding the concrete procedure of how to validate signatures. Consequently, an Incremental Saving vulnerability exists in multiple produ...Show moreThe Portable Document Format (PDF) specification does not provide any information regarding the concrete procedure of how to validate signatures. Consequently, an Incremental Saving vulnerability exists in multiple products. When an attacker uses the Incremental Saving feature to add pages or annotations, Body Updates are displayed to the user without any action by the signature-validation logic. This affects Foxit Reader before 9.4 and PhantomPDF before 8.3.9 and 9.x before 9.4. It also affects LibreOffice, Master PDF Editor, Nitro Pro, Nitro Reader, Nuance Power PDF Standard, PDF Editor 6 Pro, PDFelement6 Pro, PDF Studio Viewer 2018, PDF Studio Pro, Perfect PDF 10 Premium, and Perfect PDF Reader.Show less |
Dex is a federated OpenID Connect provider written in Go. In Dex before version 2.27.0 there is a critical set of vulnerabilities which impacts users leveraging the SAML connector. The vulnerabilities enables potential s...Show moreDex is a federated OpenID Connect provider written in Go. In Dex before version 2.27.0 there is a critical set of vulnerabilities which impacts users leveraging the SAML connector. The vulnerabilities enables potential signature bypass due to issues with XML encoding in the underlying Go library. The vulnerabilities have been addressed in version 2.27.0 by using the xml-roundtrip-validator from Mattermost (see related references).Show less |
Hyperledger Indy Node is the server portion of a distributed ledger purpose-built for decentralized identity. In Hyperledger Indy before version 1.12.4, there is lack of signature verification on a specific transaction w...Show moreHyperledger Indy Node is the server portion of a distributed ledger purpose-built for decentralized identity. In Hyperledger Indy before version 1.12.4, there is lack of signature verification on a specific transaction which enables an attacker to make certain unauthorized alterations to the ledger. Updating a DID with a nym transaction will be written to the ledger if neither ROLE or VERKEY are being changed, regardless of sender. A malicious DID with no particular role can ask an update for another DID (but cannot modify its verkey or role). This is bad because 1) Any DID can write a nym transaction to the ledger (i.e., any DID can spam the ledger with nym transactions), 2) Any DID can change any other DID's alias, 3) The update transaction modifies the ledger metadata associated with a DID.Show less |
pass through 1.7.3 has a possibility of using a password for an unintended resource. For exploitation to occur, the user must do a git pull, decrypt a password, and log into a remote service with the password. If an atta...Show morepass through 1.7.3 has a possibility of using a password for an unintended resource. For exploitation to occur, the user must do a git pull, decrypt a password, and log into a remote service with the password. If an attacker controls the central Git server or one of the other members' machines, and also controls one of the services already in the password store, they can rename one of the password files in the Git repository to something else: pass doesn't correctly verify that the content of a file matches the filename, so a user might be tricked into decrypting the wrong password and sending that to a service that the attacker controls. NOTE: for environments in which this threat model is of concern, signing commits can be a solution.Show less |
Inspur NF5266M5 through 3.21.2 and other server M5 devices allow remote code execution via administrator privileges. The Baseboard Management Controller (BMC) program of INSPUR server is weak in checking the firmware and...Show moreInspur NF5266M5 through 3.21.2 and other server M5 devices allow remote code execution via administrator privileges. The Baseboard Management Controller (BMC) program of INSPUR server is weak in checking the firmware and lacks the signature verification mechanism, the attacker who obtains the administrator's rights can control the BMC by inserting malicious code into the firmware program and bypassing the current verification mechanism to upgrade the BMC.Show less |
Python oic is a Python OpenID Connect implementation. In Python oic before version 1.2.1, there are several related cryptographic issues affecting client implementations that use the library. The issues are: 1) The IdTok...Show morePython oic is a Python OpenID Connect implementation. In Python oic before version 1.2.1, there are several related cryptographic issues affecting client implementations that use the library. The issues are: 1) The IdToken signature algorithm was not checked automatically, but only if the expected algorithm was passed in as a kwarg. 2) JWA `none` algorithm was allowed in all flows. 3) oic.consumer.Consumer.parse_authz returns an unverified IdToken. The verification of the token was left to the discretion of the implementator. 4) iat claim was not checked for sanity (i.e. it could be in the future). These issues are patched in version 1.2.1.Show less |
Tesla Model X vehicles before 2020-11-23 have key fobs that accept firmware updates without signature verification. This allows attackers to construct firmware that retrieves an unlock code from a secure enclave chip. |
A wrong generation of the passphrase for the encrypted block in Nextcloud Server 19.0.1 allowed an attacker to overwrite blocks in a file. |
Acrobat Reader DC for macOS versions 2020.012.20048 (and earlier), 2020.001.30005 (and earlier) and 2017.011.30175 (and earlier) are affected by a security feature bypass. While the practical security impact is minimal,...Show moreAcrobat Reader DC for macOS versions 2020.012.20048 (and earlier), 2020.001.30005 (and earlier) and 2017.011.30175 (and earlier) are affected by a security feature bypass. While the practical security impact is minimal, a defense-in-depth fix has been implemented to further harden the Adobe Reader update process.Show less |
Acrobat Reader DC versions 2020.012.20048 (and earlier), 2020.001.30005 (and earlier) and 2017.011.30175 (and earlier) for macOS are affected by a signature verification bypass that could result in local privilege escala...Show moreAcrobat Reader DC versions 2020.012.20048 (and earlier), 2020.001.30005 (and earlier) and 2017.011.30175 (and earlier) for macOS are affected by a signature verification bypass that could result in local privilege escalation. Exploitation of this issue requires user interaction in that a victim must open a malicious file.Show less |
An unsigned-library issue was discovered in ProlinOS through 2.4.161.8859R. This OS requires installed applications and all system binaries to be signed either by the manufacturer or by the Point Of Sale application deve...Show moreAn unsigned-library issue was discovered in ProlinOS through 2.4.161.8859R. This OS requires installed applications and all system binaries to be signed either by the manufacturer or by the Point Of Sale application developer and distributor. The signature is a 2048-byte RSA signature verified in the kernel prior to ELF execution. Shared libraries, however, do not need to be signed, and they are not verified. An attacker may execute a custom binary by compiling it as a shared object and loading it via LD_PRELOAD.Show less |
ServiceStack before 5.9.2 mishandles JWT signature verification unless an application has a custom ValidateToken function that establishes a valid minimum length for a signature. |