| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| The RBAC implementation in Cisco ASA-CX Content-Aware Security software before 9.3.1.1(112) and Cisco Prime Security Manager (PRSM) software before 9.3.1.1(112) allows remote authenticated users to change arbitrary passwords via a crafted HTTP request, aka Bug ID CSCuo94842. |
| Cisco Application Policy Infrastructure Controller (APIC) devices with software before 1.0(3h) and 1.1 before 1.1(1j) and Nexus 9000 ACI Mode switches with software before 11.0(3h) and 11.1 before 11.1(1j) allow remote authenticated users to bypass intended RBAC restrictions via crafted REST requests, aka Bug ID CSCut12998. |
| Cisco FireSIGHT System Software 6.1.0 does not use a constant-time algorithm for verifying credentials, which makes it easier for remote attackers to enumerate valid usernames by measuring timing differences, aka Bug ID CSCuy41615. |
| ClamAV (aka Clam AntiVirus) before 0.99.2 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (application crash) via a crafted mew packer executable. |
| Cisco Prime Infrastructure 2.2(2) does not properly restrict use of IFRAME elements, which makes it easier for remote attackers to conduct clickjacking attacks and unspecified other attacks via a crafted web site, related to a "cross-frame scripting (XFS)" issue, aka Bug ID CSCuw65846, a different vulnerability than CVE-2015-6434. |
| Virtual servers in F5 BIG-IP systems 11.5.0, 11.5.1 before HF11, 11.5.2, 11.5.3, 11.5.4 before HF2, 11.6.0 before HF8, 11.6.1 before HF1, 12.0.0 before HF4, and 12.1.0 before HF2, when configured with the HTTP Explicit Proxy functionality or SOCKS profile, allow remote attackers to modify the system configuration, read system files, and possibly execute arbitrary code via unspecified vectors. |
| The RPC API in the RSCD agent in BMC BladeLogic Server Automation (BSA) 8.2.x, 8.3.x, 8.5.x, 8.6.x, and 8.7.x on Linux and UNIX allows remote attackers to bypass authorization and reset arbitrary user passwords by sending an action packet to xmlrpc after an authorization failure. |
| Blink, as used in Google Chrome before 51.0.2704.63, allows remote attackers to bypass the Same Origin Policy by leveraging the mishandling of Document reattachment during destruction, related to FrameLoader.cpp and LocalFrame.cpp. |
| extensions/renderer/resources/binding.js in the extension bindings in Google Chrome before 51.0.2704.63 does not properly use prototypes, which allows remote attackers to bypass the Same Origin Policy via unspecified vectors. |
| WebKit/Source/core/css/StyleSheetContents.cpp in Blink, as used in Google Chrome before 51.0.2704.63, permits cross-origin loading of CSS stylesheets by a ServiceWorker even when the stylesheet download has an incorrect MIME type, which allows remote attackers to bypass the Same Origin Policy via a crafted web site. |
| browser/safe_browsing/srt_field_trial_win.cc in Google Chrome before 51.0.2704.63 does not use the HTTPS service on dl.google.com to obtain the Software Removal Tool, which allows remote attackers to spoof the chrome_cleanup_tool.exe (aka CCT) file via a man-in-the-middle attack on an HTTP session. |
| The Graphics driver in Huawei P8 smartphones with software GRA-TL00 before GRA-TL00C01B230, GRA-CL00 before GRA-CL00C92B230, GRA-CL10 before GRA-CL10C92B230, GRA-UL00 before GRA-UL00C00B230, and GRA-UL10 before GRA-UL10C00B230, and Mate S smartphones with software CRR-TL00 before CRR-TL00C01B160SP01, CRR-UL00 before CRR-UL00C00B160, and CRR-CL00 before CRR-CL00C92B161 allows attackers to cause a denial of service (system crash) or gain privileges via a crafted application with the graphics permission, aka an "interface access control vulnerability," a different vulnerability than CVE-2015-8680. |
| IBM Maximo Asset Management 7.1 through 7.1.1.13, 7.5.0 before 7.5.0.8 IFIX005, and 7.6.0 before 7.6.0.2 IFIX002; Maximo Asset Management 7.5.0 before 7.5.0.8 IFIX005, 7.5.1, and 7.6.0 before 7.6.0.2 IFIX002 for SmartCloud Control Desk; and Maximo Asset Management 7.1 through 7.1.1.13 and 7.2 for Tivoli IT Asset Management for IT and certain other products allow remote authenticated users to bypass intended access restrictions and establish a login session by entering an expired password. |
| NTP 4.x before 4.2.8p6 and 4.3.x before 4.3.90 do not verify peer associations of symmetric keys when authenticating packets, which might allow remote attackers to conduct impersonation attacks via an arbitrary trusted key, aka a "skeleton key." |
| WebKit in Apple iOS before 9.3.3, Safari before 9.1.2, and tvOS before 9.2.2 mishandles the location variable, which allows remote attackers to access the local filesystem via unspecified vectors. |
| The server in IBM Tivoli Storage Manager FastBack 5.5.x and 6.x before 6.1.12.2 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (service crash) via crafted packets to a TCP port. |
| The Apache HTTP Server in Apple OS X before 10.12 and OS X Server before 5.2 follows RFC 3875 section 4.1.18 and therefore does not protect applications from the presence of untrusted CGI client data in the HTTP_PROXY environment variable, which might allow remote attackers to redirect an application's outbound HTTP traffic to an arbitrary proxy server via a crafted Proxy header in an HTTP request, aka an "httpoxy" issue, a related issue to CVE-2016-5387. |
| The Apache HTTP Server 2.4.18 through 2.4.20, when mod_http2 and mod_ssl are enabled, does not properly recognize the "SSLVerifyClient require" directive for HTTP/2 request authorization, which allows remote attackers to bypass intended access restrictions by leveraging the ability to send multiple requests over a single connection and aborting a renegotiation. |
| IBM Maximo Asset Management 7.6 before 7.6.0.3 IFIX001 allows remote authenticated users to bypass intended access restrictions and read arbitrary purchase-order work logs via unspecified vectors. |
| Heap-based buffer overflow in the KeyView PDF filter in IBM Domino 8.5.x before 8.5.3 FP6 IF13 and 9.x before 9.0.1 FP6 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted PDF document, a different vulnerability than CVE-2016-0278, CVE-2016-0279, and CVE-2016-0301. |
