Search
Total
777 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v2 | CVSS v3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2023-3724 | 1 Wolfssl | 1 Wolfssl | 2023-07-28 | N/A | 8.8 HIGH |
| If a TLS 1.3 client gets neither a PSK (pre shared key) extension nor a KSE (key share extension) when connecting to a malicious server, a default predictable buffer gets used for the IKM (Input Keying Material) value when generating the session master secret. Using a potentially known IKM value when generating the session master secret key compromises the key generated, allowing an eavesdropper to reconstruct it and potentially allowing access to or meddling with message contents in the session. This issue does not affect client validation of connected servers, nor expose private key information, but could result in an insecure TLS 1.3 session when not controlling both sides of the connection. wolfSSL recommends that TLS 1.3 client side users update the version of wolfSSL used. | |||||
| CVE-2023-34143 | 3 Hitachi, Linux, Microsoft | 3 Device Manager, Linux Kernel, Windows | 2023-07-27 | N/A | 8.1 HIGH |
| Improper Validation of Certificate with Host Mismatch vulnerability in Hitachi Device Manager on Windows, Linux (Device Manager Server, Device Manager Agent, Host Data Collector components) allows Man in the Middle Attack.This issue affects Hitachi Device Manager: before 8.8.5-02. | |||||
| CVE-2023-3615 | 1 Mattermost | 1 Mattermost | 2023-07-26 | N/A | 8.1 HIGH |
| Mattermost iOS app fails to properly validate the server certificate while initializing the TLS connection allowing a network attacker to intercept the WebSockets connection. | |||||
| CVE-2021-21959 | 1 Sealevel | 2 Seaconnect 370w, Seaconnect 370w Firmware | 2022-07-29 | 6.8 MEDIUM | 8.1 HIGH |
| A misconfiguration exists in the MQTTS functionality of Sealevel Systems, Inc. SeaConnect 370W v1.3.34. This misconfiguration significantly simplifies a man-in-the-middle attack, which directly leads to control of device functionality. | |||||
| CVE-2021-34599 | 1 Codesys | 2 Development System, Git | 2022-07-28 | 5.8 MEDIUM | 7.4 HIGH |
| Affected versions of CODESYS Git in Versions prior to V1.1.0.0 lack certificate validation in HTTPS handshakes. CODESYS Git does not implement certificate validation by default, so it does not verify that the server provides a valid and trusted HTTPS certificate. Since the certificate of the server to which the connection is made is not properly verified, the server connection is vulnerable to a man-in-the-middle attack. | |||||
| CVE-2022-20860 | 1 Cisco | 1 Nexus Dashboard | 2022-07-27 | N/A | 7.4 HIGH |
| A vulnerability in the SSL/TLS implementation of Cisco Nexus Dashboard could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to alter communications with associated controllers or view sensitive information. This vulnerability exists because SSL server certificates are not validated when Cisco Nexus Dashboard is establishing a connection to Cisco Application Policy Infrastructure Controller (APIC), Cisco Cloud APIC, or Cisco Nexus Dashboard Fabric Controller, formerly Data Center Network Manager (DCNM) controllers. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by using man-in-the-middle techniques to intercept the traffic between the affected device and the controllers, and then using a crafted certificate to impersonate the controllers. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to alter communications between devices or view sensitive information, including Administrator credentials for these controllers. | |||||
| CVE-2020-16197 | 1 Octopus | 2 Octopus Server, Server | 2022-07-27 | 4.0 MEDIUM | 4.3 MEDIUM |
| 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 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. | |||||
| CVE-2021-29755 | 2 Ibm, Linux | 2 Qradar Security Information And Event Manager, Linux Kernel | 2022-07-26 | N/A | 7.5 HIGH |
| IBM QRadar SIEM 7.3, 7.4, and 7.5 does not preform proper certificate validation for some inter-host communications. IBM X-Force ID: 202015. | |||||
| CVE-2020-16093 | 2 Debian, Lemonldap-ng | 2 Debian Linux, Lemonldap\ | 2022-07-25 | N/A | 7.5 HIGH |
| In LemonLDAP::NG (aka lemonldap-ng) through 2.0.8, validity of the X.509 certificate is not checked by default when connecting to remote LDAP backends, because the default configuration of the Net::LDAPS module for Perl is used. | |||||
| CVE-2022-32210 | 1 Nodejs | 1 Undici | 2022-07-25 | N/A | 6.5 MEDIUM |
| `Undici.ProxyAgent` never verifies the remote server's certificate, and always exposes all request & response data to the proxy. This unexpectedly means that proxies can MitM all HTTPS traffic, and if the proxy's URL is HTTP then it also means that nominally HTTPS requests are actually sent via plain-text HTTP between Undici and the proxy server. | |||||
| CVE-2022-23632 | 1 Traefik | 1 Traefik | 2022-07-25 | 6.8 MEDIUM | 9.8 CRITICAL |
| Traefik is an HTTP reverse proxy and load balancer. Prior to version 2.6.1, Traefik skips the router transport layer security (TLS) configuration when the host header is a fully qualified domain name (FQDN). For a request, the TLS configuration choice can be different than the router choice, which implies the use of a wrong TLS configuration. When sending a request using FQDN handled by a router configured with a dedicated TLS configuration, the TLS configuration falls back to the default configuration that might not correspond to the configured one. If the CNAME flattening is enabled, the selected TLS configuration is the SNI one and the routing uses the CNAME value, so this can skip the expected TLS configuration. Version 2.6.1 contains a patch for this issue. As a workaround, one may add the FDQN to the host rule. However, there is no workaround if the CNAME flattening is enabled. | |||||
| CVE-2022-22946 | 1 Vmware | 1 Spring Cloud Gateway | 2022-07-25 | 2.1 LOW | 5.5 MEDIUM |
| In spring cloud gateway versions prior to 3.1.1+ , applications that are configured to enable HTTP2 and no key store or trusted certificates are set will be configured to use an insecure TrustManager. This makes the gateway able to connect to remote services with invalid or custom certificates. | |||||
| CVE-2021-44533 | 1 Nodejs | 1 Node.js | 2022-07-25 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 5.3 MEDIUM |
| Node.js < 12.22.9, < 14.18.3, < 16.13.2, and < 17.3.1 did not handle multi-value Relative Distinguished Names correctly. Attackers could craft certificate subjects containing a single-value Relative Distinguished Name that would be interpreted as a multi-value Relative Distinguished Name, for example, in order to inject a Common Name that would allow bypassing the certificate subject verification.Affected versions of Node.js that do not accept multi-value Relative Distinguished Names and are thus not vulnerable to such attacks themselves. However, third-party code that uses node's ambiguous presentation of certificate subjects may be vulnerable. | |||||
| CVE-2021-44532 | 1 Nodejs | 1 Node.js | 2022-07-25 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 5.3 MEDIUM |
| Node.js < 12.22.9, < 14.18.3, < 16.13.2, and < 17.3.1 converts SANs (Subject Alternative Names) to a string format. It uses this string to check peer certificates against hostnames when validating connections. The string format was subject to an injection vulnerability when name constraints were used within a certificate chain, allowing the bypass of these name constraints.Versions of Node.js with the fix for this escape SANs containing the problematic characters in order to prevent the injection. This behavior can be reverted through the --security-revert command-line option. | |||||
| CVE-2021-44531 | 1 Nodejs | 1 Node.js | 2022-07-25 | 5.8 MEDIUM | 7.4 HIGH |
| Accepting arbitrary Subject Alternative Name (SAN) types, unless a PKI is specifically defined to use a particular SAN type, can result in bypassing name-constrained intermediates. Node.js < 12.22.9, < 14.18.3, < 16.13.2, and < 17.3.1 was accepting URI SAN types, which PKIs are often not defined to use. Additionally, when a protocol allows URI SANs, Node.js did not match the URI correctly.Versions of Node.js with the fix for this disable the URI SAN type when checking a certificate against a hostname. This behavior can be reverted through the --security-revert command-line option. | |||||
| CVE-2020-26184 | 1 Dell | 1 Bsafe Micro-edition-suite | 2022-07-25 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| Dell BSAFE Micro Edition Suite, versions prior to 4.5.1, contain an Improper Certificate Validation vulnerability. | |||||
| CVE-2021-22131 | 1 Fortinet | 1 Fortitoken Mobile | 2022-07-25 | N/A | 5.4 MEDIUM |
| A improper validation of certificate with host mismatch in Fortinet FortiTokenAndroid version 5.0.3 and below, Fortinet FortiTokeniOS version 5.2.0 and below, Fortinet FortiTokenWinApp version 4.0.3 and below allows attacker to retrieve information disclosed via man-in-the-middle attacks. | |||||
| CVE-2020-15260 | 1 Teluu | 1 Pjsip | 2022-07-22 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 6.8 MEDIUM |
| PJSIP is a free and open source multimedia communication library written in C language implementing standard based protocols such as SIP, SDP, RTP, STUN, TURN, and ICE. In version 2.10 and earlier, PJSIP transport can be reused if they have the same IP address + port + protocol. However, this is insufficient for secure transport since it lacks remote hostname authentication. Suppose we have created a TLS connection to `sip.foo.com`, which has an IP address `100.1.1.1`. If we want to create a TLS connection to another hostname, say `sip.bar.com`, which has the same IP address, then it will reuse that existing connection, even though `100.1.1.1` does not have certificate to authenticate as `sip.bar.com`. The vulnerability allows for an insecure interaction without user awareness. It affects users who need access to connections to different destinations that translate to the same address, and allows man-in-the-middle attack if attacker can route a connection to another destination such as in the case of DNS spoofing. | |||||
| CVE-2021-22218 | 1 Gitlab | 1 Gitlab | 2022-07-22 | 4.0 MEDIUM | 2.6 LOW |
| All versions of GitLab CE/EE starting from 12.8 before 13.10.5, all versions starting from 13.11 before 13.11.5, and all versions starting from 13.12 before 13.12.2 were affected by an issue in the handling of x509 certificates that could be used to spoof author of signed commits. | |||||
| CVE-2022-31105 | 1 Linuxfoundation | 1 Argo-cd | 2022-07-20 | 5.1 MEDIUM | 9.6 CRITICAL |
| Argo CD is a declarative, GitOps continuous delivery tool for Kubernetes. Argo CD starting with version 0.4.0 and prior to 2.2.11, 2.3.6, and 2.4.5 is vulnerable to an improper certificate validation bug which could cause Argo CD to trust a malicious (or otherwise untrustworthy) OpenID Connect (OIDC) provider. A patch for this vulnerability has been released in Argo CD versions 2.4.5, 2.3.6, and 2.2.11. There are no complete workarounds, but a partial workaround is available. Those who use an external OIDC provider (not the bundled Dex instance), can mitigate the issue by setting the `oidc.config.rootCA` field in the `argocd-cm` ConfigMap. This mitigation only forces certificate validation when the API server handles login flows. It does not force certificate verification when verifying tokens on API calls. | |||||
| CVE-2022-20813 | 1 Cisco | 2 Expressway, Telepresence Video Communication Server | 2022-07-14 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 5.9 MEDIUM |
| Multiple vulnerabilities in the API and in the web-based management interface of Cisco Expressway Series and Cisco TelePresence Video Communication Server (VCS) could allow a remote attacker to overwrite arbitrary files or conduct null byte poisoning attacks on an affected device. Note: Cisco Expressway Series refers to the Expressway Control (Expressway-C) device and the Expressway Edge (Expressway-E) device. For more information about these vulnerabilities, see the Details section of this advisory. | |||||
| CVE-2014-8164 | 1 Redhat | 1 Cloudforms Management Engine | 2022-07-14 | 6.4 MEDIUM | 9.1 CRITICAL |
| A insecure configuration for certificate verification (http.verify_mode = OpenSSL::SSL::VERIFY_NONE) may lead to verification bypass in Red Hat CloudForms 5.x. | |||||
| CVE-2021-3162 | 2 Apple, Docker | 2 Macos, Docker | 2022-07-12 | 4.6 MEDIUM | 7.8 HIGH |
| Docker Desktop Community before 2.5.0.0 on macOS mishandles certificate checking, leading to local privilege escalation. | |||||
| CVE-2018-21029 | 2 Fedoraproject, Systemd Project | 2 Fedora, Systemd | 2022-07-08 | 7.5 HIGH | 9.8 CRITICAL |
| ** DISPUTED ** systemd 239 through 245 accepts any certificate signed by a trusted certificate authority for DNS Over TLS. Server Name Indication (SNI) is not sent, and there is no hostname validation with the GnuTLS backend. NOTE: This has been disputed by the developer as not a vulnerability since hostname validation does not have anything to do with this issue (i.e. there is no hostname to be sent). | |||||
| CVE-2022-26493 | 1 Drupal | 1 Saml Sp 2.0 Single Sign On | 2022-07-03 | 6.5 MEDIUM | 8.8 HIGH |
| Xecurify's miniOrange Premium, Standard, and Enterprise Drupal SAML SP modules possess an authentication and authorization bypass vulnerability. An attacker with access to a HTTP-request intercepting method is able to bypass authentication and authorization by removing the SAML Assertion Signature - impersonating existing users and existing roles, including administrative users/roles. This vulnerability is not mitigated by configuring the module to enforce signatures or certificate checks. Xecurify recommends updating miniOrange modules to their most recent versions. This vulnerability is present in paid versions of the miniOrange Drupal SAML SP product affecting Drupal 7, 8, and 9. | |||||
| CVE-2018-0227 | 1 Cisco | 2 Adaptive Security Appliance Software, Firepower Threat Defense | 2022-06-27 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| A vulnerability in the Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) Virtual Private Network (VPN) Client Certificate Authentication feature for Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to establish an SSL VPN connection and bypass certain SSL certificate verification steps. The vulnerability is due to incorrect verification of the SSL Client Certificate. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by connecting to the ASA VPN without a proper private key and certificate pair. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to establish an SSL VPN connection to the ASA when the connection should have been rejected. This vulnerability affects Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) and Firepower Threat Defense (FTD) Software that is running on the following Cisco products: 3000 Series Industrial Security Appliances (ISA), ASA 5500 Series Adaptive Security Appliances, ASA 5500-X Series Next-Generation Firewalls, ASA Services Module for Cisco Catalyst 6500 Series Switches and Cisco 7600 Series Routers, Adaptive Security Virtual Appliances (ASAv), Firepower 4110 Security Appliances, Firepower 9300 ASA Security Modules. Cisco Bug IDs: CSCvg40155. | |||||
| CVE-2022-32151 | 1 Splunk | 2 Splunk, Splunk Cloud Platform | 2022-06-24 | 6.4 MEDIUM | 9.1 CRITICAL |
| The httplib and urllib Python libraries that Splunk shipped with Splunk Enterprise did not validate certificates using the certificate authority (CA) certificate stores by default in Splunk Enterprise versions before 9.0 and Splunk Cloud Platform versions before 8.2.2203. Python 3 client libraries now verify server certificates by default and use the appropriate CA certificate stores for each library. Apps and add-ons that include their own HTTP libraries are not affected. For Splunk Enterprise, update to Splunk Enterprise version 9.0 and Configure TLS host name validation for Splunk-to-Splunk communications (https://docs.splunk.com/Documentation/Splunk/9.0.0/Security/EnableTLSCertHostnameValidation) to enable the remediation. | |||||
| CVE-2022-32152 | 1 Splunk | 2 Splunk, Splunk Cloud Platform | 2022-06-24 | 6.5 MEDIUM | 7.2 HIGH |
| Splunk Enterprise peers in Splunk Enterprise versions before 9.0 and Splunk Cloud Platform versions before 8.2.2203 did not validate the TLS certificates during Splunk-to-Splunk communications by default. Splunk peer communications configured properly with valid certificates were not vulnerable. However, an attacker with administrator credentials could add a peer without a valid certificate and connections from misconfigured nodes without valid certificates did not fail by default. For Splunk Enterprise, update to Splunk Enterprise version 9.0 and Configure TLS host name validation for Splunk-to-Splunk communications (https://docs.splunk.com/Documentation/Splunk/9.0.0/Security/EnableTLSCertHostnameValidation) to enable the remediation. | |||||
| CVE-2022-32153 | 1 Splunk | 2 Splunk, Splunk Cloud Platform | 2022-06-24 | 6.8 MEDIUM | 8.1 HIGH |
| Splunk Enterprise peers in Splunk Enterprise versions before 9.0 and Splunk Cloud Platform versions before 8.2.2203 did not validate the TLS certificates during Splunk-to-Splunk communications by default. Splunk peer communications configured properly with valid certificates were not vulnerable. However, an attacker with administrator credentials could add a peer without a valid certificate and connections from misconfigured nodes without valid certificates did not fail by default. For Splunk Enterprise, update to Splunk Enterprise version 9.0 and Configure TLS host name validation for Splunk-to-Splunk communications (https://docs.splunk.com/Documentation/Splunk/9.0.0/Security/EnableTLSCertHostnameValidation) to enable the remediation. | |||||
| CVE-2022-32156 | 1 Splunk | 2 Splunk, Universal Forwarder | 2022-06-24 | 6.8 MEDIUM | 9.8 CRITICAL |
| In Splunk Enterprise and Universal Forwarder versions before 9.0, the Splunk command-line interface (CLI) did not validate TLS certificates while connecting to a remote Splunk platform instance by default. Splunk peer communications configured properly with valid certificates were not vulnerable. However, connections from misconfigured nodes without valid certificates did not fail by default. After updating to version 9.0, see Configure TLS host name validation for the Splunk CLI (https://docs.splunk.com/Documentation/Splunk/9.0.0/Security/EnableTLSCertHostnameValidation#Configure_TLS_host_name_validation_for_the_Splunk_CLI) to enable the remediation. | |||||
| CVE-2022-29482 | 1 Dena | 1 Mobaoku-auction \& Flea Market | 2022-06-23 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 3.7 LOW |
| 'Mobaoku-Auction&Flea Market' App for iOS versions prior to 5.5.16 improperly verifies server certificates, which may allow an attacker to eavesdrop on an encrypted communication via a man-in-the-middle attack. | |||||
| CVE-2019-5102 | 1 Openwrt | 1 Openwrt | 2022-06-21 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 5.9 MEDIUM |
| An exploitable information leak vulnerability exists in the ustream-ssl library of OpenWrt, versions 18.06.4 and 15.05.1. When connecting to a remote server, the server's SSL certificate is checked but no action is taken when the certificate is invalid. An attacker could exploit this behavior by performing a man-in-the-middle attack, providing any certificate, leading to the theft of all the data sent by the client during the first request. | |||||
| CVE-2019-5101 | 1 Openwrt | 1 Openwrt | 2022-06-21 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 5.9 MEDIUM |
| An exploitable information leak vulnerability exists in the ustream-ssl library of OpenWrt, versions 18.06.4 and 15.05.1. When connecting to a remote server, the server's SSL certificate is checked but no action is taken when the certificate is invalid. An attacker could exploit this behavior by performing a man-in-the-middle attack, providing any certificate, leading to the theft of all the data sent by the client during the first request. After an SSL connection is initialized via _ustream_ssl_init, and after any data (e.g. the client's HTTP request) is written to the stream using ustream_printf, the code eventually enters the function __ustream_ssl_poll, which is used to dispatch the read/write events | |||||
| CVE-2022-32563 | 1 Couchbase | 1 Sync Gateway | 2022-06-17 | 6.8 MEDIUM | 9.8 CRITICAL |
| An issue was discovered in Couchbase Sync Gateway 3.x before 3.0.2. Admin credentials are not verified when using X.509 client-certificate authentication from Sync Gateway to Couchbase Server. When Sync Gateway is configured to authenticate with Couchbase Server using X.509 client certificates, the admin credentials provided to the Admin REST API are ignored, resulting in privilege escalation for unauthenticated users. The Public REST API is not impacted by this issue. A workaround is to replace X.509 certificate based authentication with Username and Password authentication inside the bootstrap configuration. | |||||
| CVE-2017-2913 | 1 Meetcircle | 2 Circle With Disney, Circle With Disney Firmware | 2022-06-13 | 2.6 LOW | 5.9 MEDIUM |
| An exploitable vulnerability exists in the filtering functionality of Circle with Disney. SSL certificates for specific domain names can cause the Bluecoat library to accept a different certificate than intended. An attacker can host an HTTPS server with this certificate to trigger this vulnerability. | |||||
| CVE-2022-27782 | 1 Haxx | 1 Curl | 2022-06-10 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| libcurl would reuse a previously created connection even when a TLS or SSHrelated option had been changed that should have prohibited reuse.libcurl keeps previously used connections in a connection pool for subsequenttransfers to reuse if one of them matches the setup. However, several TLS andSSH settings were left out from the configuration match checks, making themmatch too easily. | |||||
| CVE-2022-26491 | 2 Debian, Pidgin | 2 Debian Linux, Pidgin | 2022-06-09 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 5.9 MEDIUM |
| An issue was discovered in Pidgin before 2.14.9. A remote attacker who can spoof DNS responses can redirect a client connection to a malicious server. The client will perform TLS certificate verification of the malicious domain name instead of the original XMPP service domain, allowing the attacker to take over control over the XMPP connection and to obtain user credentials and all communication content. This is similar to CVE-2022-24968. | |||||
| CVE-2022-29082 | 1 Dell | 1 Emc Networker | 2022-06-08 | 4.9 MEDIUM | 4.6 MEDIUM |
| Dell EMC NetWorker versions 19.1.x, 19.1.0.x, 19.1.1.x, 19.2.x, 19.2.0.x, 19.2.1.x 19.3.x, 19.3.0.x, 19.4.x, 19.4.0.x, 19.5.x,19.5.0.x, 19.6 and 19.6.0.1 and 19.6.0.2 contain an Improper Validation of Certificate with Host Mismatch vulnerability in Rabbitmq port 5671 which could allow remote attackers to spoof certificates. | |||||
| CVE-2022-29222 | 1 Pion | 1 Dtls | 2022-06-08 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| Pion DTLS is a Go implementation of Datagram Transport Layer Security. Prior to version 2.1.5, a DTLS Client could provide a Certificate that it doesn't posses the private key for and Pion DTLS wouldn't reject it. This issue affects users that are using Client certificates only. The connection itself is still secure. The Certificate provided by clients can't be trusted when using a Pion DTLS server prior to version 2.1.5. Users should upgrade to version 2.1.5 to receive a patch. There are currently no known workarounds. | |||||
| CVE-2022-26766 | 1 Apple | 6 Ipados, Iphone Os, Mac Os X and 3 more | 2022-06-08 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 5.5 MEDIUM |
| A certificate parsing issue was addressed with improved checks. This issue is fixed in tvOS 15.5, iOS 15.5 and iPadOS 15.5, Security Update 2022-004 Catalina, watchOS 8.6, macOS Big Sur 11.6.6, macOS Monterey 12.4. A malicious app may be able to bypass signature validation. | |||||
| CVE-2018-4015 | 1 Webroot | 1 Brightcloud | 2022-06-07 | 6.8 MEDIUM | 8.1 HIGH |
| An exploitable vulnerability exists in the HTTP client functionality of the Webroot BrightCloud SDK. The configuration of the HTTP client does not enforce a secure connection by default, resulting in a failure to validate TLS certificates. An attacker could impersonate a remote BrightCloud server to exploit this vulnerability. | |||||
| CVE-2022-22306 | 1 Fortinet | 1 Fortios | 2022-06-06 | 2.9 LOW | 5.3 MEDIUM |
| An improper certificate validation vulnerability [CWE-295] in FortiOS 6.0.0 through 6.0.14, 6.2.0 through 6.2.10, 6.4.0 through 6.4.8, 7.0.0 may allow a network adjacent and unauthenticated attacker to man-in-the-middle the communication between the FortiGate and some peers such as private SDNs and external cloud platforms. | |||||
| CVE-2021-22138 | 1 Elastic | 1 Logstash | 2022-06-04 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 3.7 LOW |
| In Logstash versions after 6.4.0 and before 6.8.15 and 7.12.0 a TLS certificate validation flaw was found in the monitoring feature. When specifying a trusted server CA certificate Logstash would not properly verify the certificate returned by the monitoring server. This could result in a man in the middle style attack against the Logstash monitoring data. | |||||
| CVE-2017-2836 | 2 Debian, Freerdp | 2 Debian Linux, Freerdp | 2022-06-03 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 5.9 MEDIUM |
| An exploitable denial of service vulnerability exists within the reading of proprietary server certificates in FreeRDP 2.0.0-beta1+android11. A specially crafted challenge packet can cause the program termination leading to a denial of service condition. An attacker can compromise the server or use man in the middle to trigger this vulnerability. | |||||
| CVE-2021-25636 | 2 Fedoraproject, Libreoffice | 2 Fedora, Libreoffice | 2022-06-03 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| LibreOffice supports digital signatures of ODF documents and macros within documents, presenting visual aids that no alteration of the document occurred since the last signing and that the signature is valid. An Improper Certificate Validation vulnerability in LibreOffice allowed an attacker to create a digitally signed ODF document, by manipulating the documentsignatures.xml or macrosignatures.xml stream within the document to contain both "X509Data" and "KeyValue" children of the "KeyInfo" tag, which when opened caused LibreOffice to verify using the "KeyValue" but to report verification with the unrelated "X509Data" value. This issue affects: The Document Foundation LibreOffice 7.2 versions prior to 7.2.5. | |||||
| CVE-2022-1343 | 1 Openssl | 1 Openssl | 2022-06-02 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 5.3 MEDIUM |
| The function `OCSP_basic_verify` verifies the signer certificate on an OCSP response. In the case where the (non-default) flag OCSP_NOCHECKS is used then the response will be positive (meaning a successful verification) even in the case where the response signing certificate fails to verify. It is anticipated that most users of `OCSP_basic_verify` will not use the OCSP_NOCHECKS flag. In this case the `OCSP_basic_verify` function will return a negative value (indicating a fatal error) in the case of a certificate verification failure. The normal expected return value in this case would be 0. This issue also impacts the command line OpenSSL "ocsp" application. When verifying an ocsp response with the "-no_cert_checks" option the command line application will report that the verification is successful even though it has in fact failed. In this case the incorrect successful response will also be accompanied by error messages showing the failure and contradicting the apparently successful result. Fixed in OpenSSL 3.0.3 (Affected 3.0.0,3.0.1,3.0.2). | |||||
| CVE-2021-20230 | 1 Stunnel | 1 Stunnel | 2022-06-01 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| A flaw was found in stunnel before 5.57, where it improperly validates client certificates when it is configured to use both redirect and verifyChain options. This flaw allows an attacker with a certificate signed by a Certificate Authority, which is not the one accepted by the stunnel server, to access the tunneled service instead of being redirected to the address specified in the redirect option. The highest threat from this vulnerability is to confidentiality. | |||||
| CVE-2013-10001 | 1 Htc | 5 Mail, One Sv, One X and 2 more | 2022-06-01 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 5.9 MEDIUM |
| A vulnerability was found in HTC One/Sense 4.x. It has been rated as problematic. Affected by this issue is the certification validation of the mail client. An exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. | |||||
| CVE-2022-22787 | 1 Zoom | 1 Meetings | 2022-05-27 | 6.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| The Zoom Client for Meetings (for Android, iOS, Linux, macOS, and Windows) before version 5.10.0 fails to properly validate the hostname during a server switch request. This issue could be used in a more sophisticated attack to trick an unsuspecting users client to connect to a malicious server when attempting to use Zoom services. | |||||
| CVE-2021-29726 | 1 Ibm | 2 Secure External Authentication Server, Sterling Secure Proxy | 2022-05-26 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 5.3 MEDIUM |
| IBM Sterling Secure Proxy 6.0.3 and IBM Secure External Authentication Server 6.0.3 does not properly ensure that a certificate is actually associated with the host due to improper validation of certificates. IBM X-Force ID: 201104. | |||||