WaratekVRT Sign in
Reset
More filters (1)
Columns
Including CVEs outside Waratek scope✕CWE CWE-843✕
Overview 6 matches · 0 in Waratek scope · 0 protected · 0 exploited · 0 CISA KEV · 0 public PoC
6matches 0in Waratek scope0.0% 0protected0.0% 0exploited0.0% 0CISA KEV0.0% 0public PoC0.0%
Protected by Waratek 0 0.0% Rule in development 0 0.0% Mitigation candidate 0 0.0% No exploit published 0 0.0% Outside Waratek scope 1 16.7% Not applicable 5 83.3% Withdrawn CVE 0 0.0%
Critical 0 0.0% High 5 83.3% Medium 1 16.7% Low 0 0.0% None 0 0.0% Unknown 0 0.0%
blocked by ARMR today 0 0.0% partly blocked 0 0.0% not blocked 6 100.0% not established 0 0.0% unrecorded 0 0.0%
Exploited 0 0.0% Working exploit published 0 0.0% Proof of concept only 0 0.0% Forecast only 6 100.0% No public exploit 0 0.0%
6 matches Sign in to download these CVEs as CSV or JSON, or to follow them in a feed.
CVE Severity Published▾ Status Exploitation Description
CVE-2024-6119 High 2024-09-03 Outside Waratek scope Forecast only Issue summary: Applications performing certificate name checks (e.g., TLS clients checking server certificates) may attempt to read an invalid memory address resulting in abnormal termination of the application process. Impact summary: Abnormal termination of an application can a cause a denial of service. Applications performing certificate name checks (e.g., TLS clients checking server certificates) may attempt to read an invalid memory address when comparing the expected name with an `otherName` subject alternative name of an X.509 certificate. This may result in an exception that terminates the application program. Note that basic certificate chain validation (signatures, dates, ...) is not affected, the denial of service can occur only when the application also specifies an expected DNS name, Email address or IP address. TLS servers rarely solicit client certificates, and even when they do, they generally don't perform a name check against a reference identifier (expected identity), but rather extract the presented identity after checking the certificate chain. So TLS servers are generally not affected and the severity of the issue is Moderate. The FIPS modules in 3.3, 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected by this issue.
CVE-2023-34967 Medium 2023-07-20 Not applicable Forecast only A Type Confusion vulnerability was found in Samba's mdssvc RPC service for Spotlight. When parsing Spotlight mdssvc RPC packets, one encoded data structure is a key-value style dictionary where the keys are character strings, and the values can be any of the supported types in the mdssvc protocol. Due to a lack of type checking in callers of the dalloc_value_for_key() function, which returns the object associated with a key, a caller may trigger a crash in talloc_get_size() when talloc detects that the passed-in pointer is not a valid talloc pointer. With an RPC worker process shared among multiple client connections, a malicious client or attacker can trigger a process crash in a shared RPC mdssvc worker process, affecting all other clients this worker serves.
CVE-2023-3420 High 2023-06-26 Not applicable Forecast only Type Confusion in V8 in Google Chrome prior to 114.0.5735.198 allowed a remote attacker to potentially exploit heap corruption via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High)
CVE-2023-0286 High 2023-02-08 Not applicable Forecast only There is a type confusion vulnerability relating to X.400 address processing inside an X.509 GeneralName. X.400 addresses were parsed as an ASN1_STRING but the public structure definition for GENERAL_NAME incorrectly specified the type of the x400Address field as ASN1_TYPE. This field is subsequently interpreted by the OpenSSL function GENERAL_NAME_cmp as an ASN1_TYPE rather than an ASN1_STRING. When CRL checking is enabled (i.e. the application sets the X509_V_FLAG_CRL_CHECK flag), this vulnerability may allow an attacker to pass arbitrary pointers to a memcmp call, enabling them to read memory contents or enact a denial of service. In most cases, the attack requires the attacker to provide both the certificate chain and CRL, neither of which need to have a valid signature. If the attacker only controls one of these inputs, the other input must already contain an X.400 address as a CRL distribution point, which is uncommon. As such, this vulnerability is most likely to only affect applications which have implemented their own functionality for retrieving CRLs over a network.
CVE-2020-1421 High 2020-07-14 Not applicable Forecast only A remote code execution vulnerability exists in Microsoft Windows that could allow remote code execution if a .LNK file is processed.An attacker who successfully exploited this vulnerability could gain the same user rights as the local user, aka 'LNK Remote Code Execution Vulnerability'.
CVE-2010-0258 High 2010-03-10 Not applicable Forecast only Microsoft Office Excel 2002 SP3, 2003 SP3, and 2007 SP1 and SP2; Office 2004 and 2008 for Mac; Open XML File Format Converter for Mac; Office Excel Viewer SP1 and SP2; and Office Compatibility Pack for Word, Excel, and PowerPoint 2007 File Formats SP1 and SP2 do not properly parse the Excel file format, which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted spreadsheet that causes memory to be interpreted as a different object type than intended, aka "Microsoft Office Excel Sheet Object Type Confusion Vulnerability."