Protection mechanism failure in Windows Mark of the Web (MOTW) allows an unauthorized attacker to bypass a security feature locally. |
A vulnerability has been identified in SIMATIC Field PG M5 (All versions), SIMATIC Field PG M6 (All versions < V26.01.12), SIMATIC IPC BX-21A (All versions < V31.01.07), SIMATIC IPC BX-32A (All versions < V29.01.07), SIM...Show moreA vulnerability has been identified in SIMATIC Field PG M5 (All versions), SIMATIC Field PG M6 (All versions < V26.01.12), SIMATIC IPC BX-21A (All versions < V31.01.07), SIMATIC IPC BX-32A (All versions < V29.01.07), SIMATIC IPC BX-39A (All versions < V29.01.07), SIMATIC IPC BX-59A (All versions < V32.01.04), SIMATIC IPC PX-32A (All versions < V29.01.07), SIMATIC IPC PX-39A (All versions < V29.01.07), SIMATIC IPC PX-39A PRO (All versions < V29.01.07), SIMATIC IPC RC-543A (All versions < V36.01.03), SIMATIC IPC RC-543B (All versions < V35.01.12), SIMATIC IPC RW-543A (All versions < V1.1.4), SIMATIC IPC RW-543B (All versions < V35.02.10), SIMATIC IPC127E (All versions < V27.01.11), SIMATIC IPC227E (All versions), SIMATIC IPC227G (All versions < V28.01.14), SIMATIC IPC277E (All versions), SIMATIC IPC277G (All versions < V28.01.14), SIMATIC IPC277G PRO (All versions < V28.01.14), SIMATIC IPC3000 SMART V3 (All versions), SIMATIC IPC327G (All versions < V28.01.14), SIMATIC IPC347G (All versions), SIMATIC IPC377G (All versions < V28.01.14), SIMATIC IPC427E (All versions), SIMATIC IPC477E (All versions), SIMATIC IPC477E PRO (All versions), SIMATIC IPC527G (All versions), SIMATIC IPC627E (All versions < V25.02.15), SIMATIC IPC647E (All versions < V25.02.15), SIMATIC IPC677E (All versions < V25.02.15), SIMATIC IPC847E (All versions < V25.02.15), SIMATIC ITP1000 (All versions). The affected devices have insufficient protection mechanism for the EFI(Extensible Firmware Interface) variables stored on the device. This could allow an authenticated attacker to disable the BIOS password without proper authorization by directly communicate with the flash controller.Show less |
A vulnerability has been identified in SIMATIC Field PG M5 (All versions), SIMATIC IPC BX-21A (All versions < V31.01.07), SIMATIC IPC BX-32A (All versions < V29.01.07), SIMATIC IPC BX-39A (All versions < V29.01.07), SIMA...Show moreA vulnerability has been identified in SIMATIC Field PG M5 (All versions), SIMATIC IPC BX-21A (All versions < V31.01.07), SIMATIC IPC BX-32A (All versions < V29.01.07), SIMATIC IPC BX-39A (All versions < V29.01.07), SIMATIC IPC BX-59A (All versions < V32.01.04), SIMATIC IPC PX-32A (All versions < V29.01.07), SIMATIC IPC PX-39A (All versions < V29.01.07), SIMATIC IPC PX-39A PRO (All versions < V29.01.07), SIMATIC IPC RC-543A (All versions < V36.01.03), SIMATIC IPC RC-543B (All versions < V35.01.12), SIMATIC IPC RW-543A (All versions < V1.1.4), SIMATIC IPC RW-543B (All versions < V35.02.10), SIMATIC IPC127E (All versions < V27.01.11), SIMATIC IPC227E (All versions), SIMATIC IPC227G (All versions < V28.01.14), SIMATIC IPC277E (All versions), SIMATIC IPC277G (All versions < V28.01.14), SIMATIC IPC277G PRO (All versions < V28.01.14), SIMATIC IPC3000 SMART V3 (All versions), SIMATIC IPC327G (All versions < V28.01.14), SIMATIC IPC347G (All versions), SIMATIC IPC377G (All versions < V28.01.14), SIMATIC IPC427E (All versions), SIMATIC IPC477E (All versions), SIMATIC IPC477E PRO (All versions), SIMATIC IPC527G (All versions), SIMATIC IPC627E (All versions < V25.02.15), SIMATIC IPC647E (All versions < V25.02.15), SIMATIC IPC677E (All versions < V25.02.15), SIMATIC IPC847E (All versions < V25.02.15), SIMATIC ITP1000 (All versions). The affected devices have insufficient protection mechanism for the EFI(Extensible Firmware Interface) variables stored on the device. This could allow an authenticated attacker to alter the secure boot configuration without proper authorization by directly communicate with the flash controller.Show less |
Vasion Print (formerly PrinterLogic) before Virtual Appliance Host 22.0.843 Application 20.0.1923 allows Insufficient Antivirus Protection and thus drivers can have known malicious code OVE-20230524-0009. |
The WP Ghost (Hide My WP Ghost) – Security & Firewall plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Login Page Dislcosure in all versions up to, and including, 5.3.02. This is due to the plugin not properly restricting the /wp-r...Show moreThe WP Ghost (Hide My WP Ghost) – Security & Firewall plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Login Page Dislcosure in all versions up to, and including, 5.3.02. This is due to the plugin not properly restricting the /wp-register.php path. This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to discover the hidden login page location.Show less |
7-Zip Mark-of-the-Web Bypass Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to bypass the Mark-of-the-Web protection mechanism on affected installations of 7-Zip. User interaction is required to exploit this v...Show more7-Zip Mark-of-the-Web Bypass Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to bypass the Mark-of-the-Web protection mechanism on affected installations of 7-Zip. User interaction is required to exploit this vulnerability in that the target must visit a malicious page or open a malicious file.
The specific flaw exists within the handling of archived files. When extracting files from a crafted archive that bears the Mark-of-the-Web, 7-Zip does not propagate the Mark-of-the-Web to the extracted files. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute arbitrary code in the context of the current user. Was ZDI-CAN-25456.Show less |
A vulnerability has been found in Union Bank of India Vyom 8.0.34 on Android and classified as problematic. This vulnerability affects unknown code of the component Rooting Detection. The manipulation leads to protection...Show moreA vulnerability has been found in Union Bank of India Vyom 8.0.34 on Android and classified as problematic. This vulnerability affects unknown code of the component Rooting Detection. The manipulation leads to protection mechanism failure. The attack needs to be approached locally. The complexity of an attack is rather high. The exploitation appears to be difficult. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.Show less |
Microsoft Office Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability |
Windows MapUrlToZone Denial of Service Vulnerability |
Windows NTLM Spoofing Vulnerability |
Secure Boot Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability |
A denial of service vulnerability was found in Keycloak that could allow an administrative user with the right to change realm settings to disrupt the service. This action is done by modifying any of the security headers...Show moreA denial of service vulnerability was found in Keycloak that could allow an administrative user with the right to change realm settings to disrupt the service. This action is done by modifying any of the security headers and inserting newlines, which causes the Keycloak server to write to a request that has already been terminated, leading to the failure of said request.Show less |
Jinja is an extensible templating engine. Prior to 3.1.5, An oversight in how the Jinja sandboxed environment detects calls to str.format allows an attacker that controls the content of a template to execute arbitrary Py...Show moreJinja is an extensible templating engine. Prior to 3.1.5, An oversight in how the Jinja sandboxed environment detects calls to str.format allows an attacker that controls the content of a template to execute arbitrary Python code. To exploit the vulnerability, an attacker needs to control the content of a template. Whether that is the case depends on the type of application using Jinja. This vulnerability impacts users of applications which execute untrusted templates. Jinja's sandbox does catch calls to str.format and ensures they don't escape the sandbox. However, it's possible to store a reference to a malicious string's format method, then pass that to a filter that calls it. No such filters are built-in to Jinja, but could be present through custom filters in an application. After the fix, such indirect calls are also handled by the sandbox. This vulnerability is fixed in 3.1.5.Show less |
WinZip Mark-of-the-Web Bypass Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to bypass the Mark-of-the-Web protection mechanism on affected installations of WinZip. User interaction is required to exploit this...Show moreWinZip Mark-of-the-Web Bypass Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to bypass the Mark-of-the-Web protection mechanism on affected installations of WinZip. User interaction is required to exploit this vulnerability in that the target must visit a malicious page or open a malicious file.
The specific flaw exists within the handling of archive files. When opening an archive that bears the Mark-of-the-Web, WinZip removes the Mark-of-the-Web from the archive file. Following extraction, the extracted files also lack the Mark-of-the-Web. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute arbitrary code in the context of the current user. Was ZDI-CAN-23983.Show less |
The Lock User Account plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to user lock bypass in all versions up to, and including, 1.0.5. This is due to permitting application password logins when user accounts are locked. This makes it...Show moreThe Lock User Account plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to user lock bypass in all versions up to, and including, 1.0.5. This is due to permitting application password logins when user accounts are locked. This makes it possible for authenticated attackers, with existing application passwords, to interact with the vulnerable site via an API such as XML-RPC or REST despite their account being locked.Show less |
Multiple Cisco products are affected by a vulnerability in the Snort detection engine that could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to bypass a configured file policy for HTTP.
The vulnerability is due to incorr...Show moreMultiple Cisco products are affected by a vulnerability in the Snort detection engine that could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to bypass a configured file policy for HTTP.
The vulnerability is due to incorrect handling of specific HTTP header parameters. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by sending crafted HTTP packets through an affected device. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to bypass a configured file policy for HTTP packets and deliver a malicious payload.Show less |
Protection mechanism failure in the SPP for some Intel(R) Xeon(R) processor family (E-Core) may allow an authenticated user to potentially enable escalation of privilege via local access. |
Protection mechanism failure in the SPP for some Intel(R) Processors may allow an authenticated user to potentially enable escalation of privilege via local access. |
Windows Defender Application Control (WDAC) Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability |
Windows Package Library Manager Information Disclosure Vulnerability |