| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| A vulnerability has been identified in SINEC NMS (All versions < V4.0 SP3), User Management Component (UMC) (All versions < V2.15.2.1). The affected application permits improper modification of a configuration file by a low-privileged user.
This could allow an attacker to load malicious DLLs, potentially leading to arbitrary code execution with SYSTEM privileges.(ZDI-CAN-28108) |
| Affected devices do not properly sanitize an input field. This could allow an authenticated remote attacker with administrative privileges to inject code or spawn a system root shell. Follow-up of CVE-2022-36323. |
| Affected devices do not properly sanitize data introduced by an user when rendering the web interface. This could allow an authenticated remote attacker with administrative privileges to inject code and lead to a DOM-based XSS. |
| Affected devices do not properly handle the renegotiation of SSL/TLS parameters. This could allow an unauthenticated remote attacker to bypass the TCP brute force prevention and lead to a denial of service condition for the duration of the attack. |
| Affected devices do not properly sanitize an input field. This could allow an authenticated remote attacker with administrative privileges to inject code or spawn a system root shell. |
| Affected devices do not properly authorize the change password function of the web interface.
This could allow low privileged users to escalate their privileges. |
| An issue was discovered on Samsung Galaxy S3 i9305 4.4.4 devices. The WPA, WPA2, and WPA3 implementations reassemble fragments with non-consecutive packet numbers. An adversary can abuse this to exfiltrate selected fragments. This vulnerability is exploitable when another device sends fragmented frames and the WEP, CCMP, or GCMP data-confidentiality protocol is used. Note that WEP is vulnerable to this attack by design. |
| An issue was discovered on Samsung Galaxy S3 i9305 4.4.4 devices. The WEP, WPA, WPA2, and WPA3 implementations accept second (or subsequent) broadcast fragments even when sent in plaintext and process them as full unfragmented frames. An adversary can abuse this to inject arbitrary network packets independent of the network configuration. |
| An issue was discovered on Samsung Galaxy S3 i9305 4.4.4 devices. The WEP, WPA, WPA2, and WPA3 implementations accept plaintext A-MSDU frames as long as the first 8 bytes correspond to a valid RFC1042 (i.e., LLC/SNAP) header for EAPOL. An adversary can abuse this to inject arbitrary network packets independent of the network configuration. |
| An issue was discovered in the ALFA Windows 10 driver 1030.36.604 for AWUS036ACH. The WEP, WPA, WPA2, and WPA3 implementations accept fragmented plaintext frames in a protected Wi-Fi network. An adversary can abuse this to inject arbitrary data frames independent of the network configuration. |
| An issue was discovered in the ALFA Windows 10 driver 6.1316.1209 for AWUS036H. The Wi-Fi implementation does not verify the Message Integrity Check (authenticity) of fragmented TKIP frames. An adversary can abuse this to inject and possibly decrypt packets in WPA or WPA2 networks that support the TKIP data-confidentiality protocol. |
| An issue was discovered in the ALFA Windows 10 driver 6.1316.1209 for AWUS036H. The WEP, WPA, WPA2, and WPA3 implementations accept plaintext frames in a protected Wi-Fi network. An adversary can abuse this to inject arbitrary data frames independent of the network configuration. |
| The 802.11 standard that underpins Wi-Fi Protected Access (WPA, WPA2, and WPA3) and Wired Equivalent Privacy (WEP) doesn't require that the A-MSDU flag in the plaintext QoS header field is authenticated. Against devices that support receiving non-SSP A-MSDU frames (which is mandatory as part of 802.11n), an adversary can abuse this to inject arbitrary network packets. |
| An issue was discovered in the Linux kernel 5.8.9. The WEP, WPA, WPA2, and WPA3 implementations reassemble fragments even though some of them were sent in plaintext. This vulnerability can be abused to inject packets and/or exfiltrate selected fragments when another device sends fragmented frames and the WEP, CCMP, or GCMP data-confidentiality protocol is used. |
| ASN.1 strings are represented internally within OpenSSL as an ASN1_STRING structure which contains a buffer holding the string data and a field holding the buffer length. This contrasts with normal C strings which are repesented as a buffer for the string data which is terminated with a NUL (0) byte. Although not a strict requirement, ASN.1 strings that are parsed using OpenSSL's own "d2i" functions (and other similar parsing functions) as well as any string whose value has been set with the ASN1_STRING_set() function will additionally NUL terminate the byte array in the ASN1_STRING structure. However, it is possible for applications to directly construct valid ASN1_STRING structures which do not NUL terminate the byte array by directly setting the "data" and "length" fields in the ASN1_STRING array. This can also happen by using the ASN1_STRING_set0() function. Numerous OpenSSL functions that print ASN.1 data have been found to assume that the ASN1_STRING byte array will be NUL terminated, even though this is not guaranteed for strings that have been directly constructed. Where an application requests an ASN.1 structure to be printed, and where that ASN.1 structure contains ASN1_STRINGs that have been directly constructed by the application without NUL terminating the "data" field, then a read buffer overrun can occur. The same thing can also occur during name constraints processing of certificates (for example if a certificate has been directly constructed by the application instead of loading it via the OpenSSL parsing functions, and the certificate contains non NUL terminated ASN1_STRING structures). It can also occur in the X509_get1_email(), X509_REQ_get1_email() and X509_get1_ocsp() functions. If a malicious actor can cause an application to directly construct an ASN1_STRING and then process it through one of the affected OpenSSL functions then this issue could be hit. This might result in a crash (causing a Denial of Service attack). It could also result in the disclosure of private memory contents (such as private keys, or sensitive plaintext). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1l (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1k). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2za (Affected 1.0.2-1.0.2y). |
| Affected devices contain a vulnerability that allows an unauthenticated attacker to trigger a denial of service condition. The vulnerability can be triggered if a large amount of DCP reset packets are sent to the device. |
| A vulnerability has been identified in CPCI85 Central Processing/Communication (All versions < V26.10), RTUM85 RTU Base (All versions < V26.10). The affected application contains denial-of-service (DoS) vulnerability. The remote operation mode is susceptible to a resource exhaustion condition when subjected to a high volume of requests. Sending multiple requests can exhaust resources, preventing parameterization and requiring a reset or reboot to restore functionality. |
| A vulnerability has been identified in CPCI85 Central Processing/Communication (All versions < V26.10), SICORE Base system (All versions < V26.10.0). The affected application contains an out-of-bounds write vulnerability while parsing specially crafted XML inputs. This could allow an unauthenticated attacker to exploit this issue by sending a malicious XML request, which may cause the service to crash, resulting in a denial-of-service condition. |
| Affected devices do not properly sanitize contents of trace files.
This could allow an attacker to inject code through social engineering an authorized user, who has the function right "Read diagnostics", to import a specially crafted trace file.
The malicious trace file is insufficiently sanitized and malicious code could be executed in the clients browser session and trigger PLC operations via the webserver that the legitimate user is authorized to perform. |
| A vulnerability has been identified in SINEC Security Monitor (All versions < V4.9.0). The affected application leaks confidential information in metadata, and files such as information on contributors and email address, on `SSM Server`. |
