Total
529 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2018-3756 | 1 Hyperledger | 1 Iroha | 2024-11-21 | N/A |
| Hyperledger Iroha versions v1.0_beta and v1.0.0_beta-1 are vulnerable to transaction and block signature verification bypass in the transaction and block validator allowing a single node to sign a transaction and/or block multiple times, each with a random nonce, and have other validating nodes accept them as separate valid signatures. | ||||
| CVE-2018-3136 | 5 Canonical, Debian, Hp and 2 more | 17 Ubuntu Linux, Debian Linux, Xp7 Command View and 14 more | 2024-11-21 | 3.4 Low |
| Vulnerability in the Java SE, Java SE Embedded component of Oracle Java SE (subcomponent: Security). Supported versions that are affected are Java SE: 6u201, 7u191, 8u182 and 11; Java SE Embedded: 8u181. Difficult to exploit vulnerability allows unauthenticated attacker with network access via multiple protocols to compromise Java SE, Java SE Embedded. Successful attacks require human interaction from a person other than the attacker and while the vulnerability is in Java SE, Java SE Embedded, attacks may significantly impact additional products. Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in unauthorized update, insert or delete access to some of Java SE, Java SE Embedded accessible data. Note: This vulnerability applies to Java deployments, typically in clients running sandboxed Java Web Start applications or sandboxed Java applets (in Java SE 8), that load and run untrusted code (e.g. code that comes from the internet) and rely on the Java sandbox for security. This vulnerability does not apply to Java deployments, typically in servers, that load and run only trusted code (e.g. code installed by an administrator). CVSS 3.0 Base Score 3.4 (Integrity impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:N/I:L/A:N). | ||||
| CVE-2018-2790 | 6 Canonical, Debian, Hp and 3 more | 17 Ubuntu Linux, Debian Linux, Xp7 Command View and 14 more | 2024-11-21 | 3.1 Low |
| Vulnerability in the Java SE, Java SE Embedded component of Oracle Java SE (subcomponent: Security). Supported versions that are affected are Java SE: 6u181, 7u171, 8u162 and 10; Java SE Embedded: 8u161. Difficult to exploit vulnerability allows unauthenticated attacker with network access via multiple protocols to compromise Java SE, Java SE Embedded. Successful attacks require human interaction from a person other than the attacker. Successful attacks of this vulnerability can result in unauthorized update, insert or delete access to some of Java SE, Java SE Embedded accessible data. Note: This vulnerability applies to Java deployments, typically in clients running sandboxed Java Web Start applications or sandboxed Java applets, that load and run untrusted code (e.g., code that comes from the internet) and rely on the Java sandbox for security. This vulnerability does not apply to Java deployments, typically in servers, that load and run only trusted code (e.g., code installed by an administrator). CVSS 3.0 Base Score 3.1 (Integrity impacts). CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N). | ||||
| CVE-2018-1842 | 2 Ibm, Netapp | 2 Cognos Analytics, Oncommand Insight | 2024-11-21 | N/A |
| IBM Cognos Analytics 11 Configuration tool, under certain circumstances, will bypass OIDC namespace signature verification on its id_token. IBM X-Force ID: 150902. | ||||
| CVE-2018-18688 | 11 Apple, Code-industry, Foxitsoftware and 8 more | 16 Macos, Master Pdf Editor, Foxit Reader and 13 more | 2024-11-21 | 5.3 Medium |
| 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 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. | ||||
| CVE-2018-18653 | 1 Canonical | 1 Ubuntu Linux | 2024-11-21 | N/A |
| The Linux kernel, as used in Ubuntu 18.10 and when booted with UEFI Secure Boot enabled, allows privileged local users to bypass intended Secure Boot restrictions and execute untrusted code by loading arbitrary kernel modules. This occurs because a modified kernel/module.c, in conjunction with certain configuration options, leads to mishandling of the result of signature verification. | ||||
| CVE-2018-18509 | 2 Mozilla, Redhat | 2 Thunderbird, Enterprise Linux | 2024-11-21 | N/A |
| A flaw during verification of certain S/MIME signatures causes emails to be shown in Thunderbird as having a valid digital signature, even if the shown message contents aren't covered by the signature. The flaw allows an attacker to reuse a valid S/MIME signature to craft an email message with arbitrary content. This vulnerability affects Thunderbird < 60.5.1. | ||||
| CVE-2018-18203 | 1 Subaru | 6 Starlink 2017, Starlink 2017 Firmware, Starlink 2018 and 3 more | 2024-11-21 | N/A |
| A vulnerability in the update mechanism of Subaru StarLink Harman head units 2017, 2018, and 2019 may give an attacker (with physical access to the vehicle's USB ports) the ability to rewrite the firmware of the head unit. This occurs because the device accepts modified QNX6 filesystem images (as long as the attacker obtains access to certain Harman decryption/encryption code) as a consequence of a bug where unsigned images pass a validity check. An attacker could potentially install persistent malicious head unit firmware and execute arbitrary code as the root user. | ||||
| CVE-2018-16557 | 1 Siemens | 8 Simatic S7-400, Simatic S7-400 Firmware, Simatic S7-400 Pn\/dp V7 and 5 more | 2024-11-21 | 8.2 High |
| A vulnerability has been identified in SIMATIC S7-400 CPU 412-1 DP V7 (All versions), SIMATIC S7-400 CPU 412-2 DP V7 (All versions), SIMATIC S7-400 CPU 414-2 DP V7 (All versions), SIMATIC S7-400 CPU 414-3 DP V7 (All versions), SIMATIC S7-400 CPU 414-3 PN/DP V7 (All versions < V7.0.3), SIMATIC S7-400 CPU 414F-3 PN/DP V7 (All versions < V7.0.3), SIMATIC S7-400 CPU 416-2 DP V7 (All versions), SIMATIC S7-400 CPU 416-3 DP V7 (All versions), SIMATIC S7-400 CPU 416-3 PN/DP V7 (All versions < V7.0.3), SIMATIC S7-400 CPU 416F-2 DP V7 (All versions), SIMATIC S7-400 CPU 416F-3 PN/DP V7 (All versions < V7.0.3), SIMATIC S7-400 CPU 417-4 DP V7 (All versions), SIMATIC S7-400 CPU 412-2 PN V7 (All versions < V7.0.3), SIMATIC S7-400 H V4.5 and below CPU family (incl. SIPLUS variants) (All versions), SIMATIC S7-400 H V6 CPU family (incl. SIPLUS variants) (All versions < V6.0.9), SIMATIC S7-400 PN/DP V6 and below CPU family (incl. SIPLUS variants) (All versions), SIMATIC S7-410 CPU family (incl. SIPLUS variants) (All versions < V8.2.1), SIPLUS S7-400 CPU 414-3 PN/DP V7 (All versions < V7.0.3), SIPLUS S7-400 CPU 416-3 PN/DP V7 (All versions < V7.0.3), SIPLUS S7-400 CPU 416-3 V7 (All versions), SIPLUS S7-400 CPU 417-4 V7 (All versions). Sending of specially crafted packets to port 102/tcp via Ethernet interface via PROFIBUS or Multi Point Interfaces (MPI) could cause a denial of service condition on affected devices. Flashing with a firmware image may be required to recover the CPU. Successful exploitation requires an attacker to have network access to port 102/tcp via Ethernet interface or to be able to send messages via PROFIBUS or Multi Point Interfaces (MPI) to the device. No user interaction is required. If no access protection is configured, no privileges are required to exploit the security vulnerability. The vulnerability could allow causing a denial of service condition of the core functionality of the CPU, compromising the availability of the system. | ||||
| CVE-2018-16515 | 2 Debian, Matrix | 2 Debian Linux, Synapse | 2024-11-21 | N/A |
| Matrix Synapse before 0.33.3.1 allows remote attackers to spoof events and possibly have unspecified other impacts by leveraging improper transaction and event signature validation. | ||||
| CVE-2018-16253 | 1 Axtls Project | 1 Axtls | 2024-11-21 | N/A |
| In sig_verify() in x509.c in axTLS version 2.1.3 and before, the PKCS#1 v1.5 signature verification does not properly verify the ASN.1 metadata. Consequently, a remote attacker can forge signatures when small public exponents are being used, which could lead to impersonation through fake X.509 certificates. This is an even more permissive variant of CVE-2006-4790 and CVE-2014-1568. | ||||
| CVE-2018-16152 | 3 Canonical, Debian, Strongswan | 3 Ubuntu Linux, Debian Linux, Strongswan | 2024-11-21 | N/A |
| In verify_emsa_pkcs1_signature() in gmp_rsa_public_key.c in the gmp plugin in strongSwan 4.x and 5.x before 5.7.0, the RSA implementation based on GMP does not reject excess data in the digestAlgorithm.parameters field during PKCS#1 v1.5 signature verification. Consequently, a remote attacker can forge signatures when small public exponents are being used, which could lead to impersonation when only an RSA signature is used for IKEv2 authentication. This is a variant of CVE-2006-4790 and CVE-2014-1568. | ||||
| CVE-2018-16151 | 3 Canonical, Debian, Strongswan | 3 Ubuntu Linux, Debian Linux, Strongswan | 2024-11-21 | N/A |
| In verify_emsa_pkcs1_signature() in gmp_rsa_public_key.c in the gmp plugin in strongSwan 4.x and 5.x before 5.7.0, the RSA implementation based on GMP does not reject excess data after the encoded algorithm OID during PKCS#1 v1.5 signature verification. Similar to the flaw in the same version of strongSwan regarding digestAlgorithm.parameters, a remote attacker can forge signatures when small public exponents are being used, which could lead to impersonation when only an RSA signature is used for IKEv2 authentication. | ||||
| CVE-2018-16150 | 1 Axtls Project | 1 Axtls | 2024-11-21 | N/A |
| In sig_verify() in x509.c in axTLS version 2.1.3 and before, the PKCS#1 v1.5 signature verification does not reject excess data after the hash value. Consequently, a remote attacker can forge signatures when small public exponents are being used, which could lead to impersonation through fake X.509 certificates. This is a variant of CVE-2006-4340. | ||||
| CVE-2018-16149 | 1 Axtls Project | 1 Axtls | 2024-11-21 | N/A |
| In sig_verify() in x509.c in axTLS version 2.1.3 and before, the PKCS#1 v1.5 signature verification blindly trusts the declared lengths in the ASN.1 structure. Consequently, when small public exponents are being used, a remote attacker can generate purposefully crafted signatures (and put them on X.509 certificates) to induce illegal memory access and crash the verifier. | ||||
| CVE-2018-16042 | 5 Adobe, Apple, Iskysoft and 2 more | 8 Acrobat Dc, Acrobat Reader Dc, Reader and 5 more | 2024-11-21 | 6.5 Medium |
| Adobe Acrobat and Reader versions 2019.008.20081 and earlier, 2019.008.20080 and earlier, 2019.008.20081 and earlier, 2017.011.30106 and earlier version, 2017.011.30105 and earlier version, 2015.006.30457 and earlier, and 2015.006.30456 and earlier have a security bypass vulnerability. Successful exploitation could lead to information disclosure. | ||||
| CVE-2018-15836 | 1 Xelerance | 1 Openswan | 2024-11-21 | N/A |
| In verify_signed_hash() in lib/liboswkeys/signatures.c in Openswan before 2.6.50.1, the RSA implementation does not verify the value of padding string during PKCS#1 v1.5 signature verification. Consequently, a remote attacker can forge signatures when small public exponents are being used. IKEv2 signature verification is affected when RAW RSA keys are used. | ||||
| CVE-2018-15587 | 3 Debian, Gnome, Redhat | 3 Debian Linux, Evolution, Enterprise Linux | 2024-11-21 | N/A |
| GNOME Evolution through 3.28.2 is prone to OpenPGP signatures being spoofed for arbitrary messages using a specially crafted email that contains a valid signature from the entity to be impersonated as an attachment. | ||||
| CVE-2018-15586 | 1 Enigmail | 1 Enigmail | 2024-11-21 | N/A |
| Enigmail before 2.0.6 is prone to to OpenPGP signatures being spoofed for arbitrary messages using a PGP/INLINE signature wrapped within a specially crafted multipart HTML email. | ||||
| CVE-2018-12556 | 1 Yarnpkg | 1 Website | 2024-11-21 | N/A |
| The signature verification routine in install.sh in yarnpkg/website through 2018-06-05 only verifies that the yarn release is signed by any (arbitrary) key in the local keyring of the user, and does not pin the signature to the yarn release key, which allows remote attackers to sign tampered yarn release packages with their own key. | ||||