Overview 3 matches · 1 protected · 0 exploited · 0 CISA KEV · 2 public PoC
Protected by Waratek
1
33.3%
Rule in development
0
0.0%
Mitigation candidate
1
33.3%
No exploit published
1
33.3%
blocked by ARMR today
1
33.3%
partly blocked
0
0.0%
not blocked
2
66.7%
not established
0
0.0%
unrecorded
0
0.0%
Exploited
0
0.0%
Working exploit published
2
66.7%
Proof of concept only
0
0.0%
Forecast only
1
33.3%
No public exploit
0
0.0%
split by
peak 1 / month
May 201
Protected by Waratek1
High1
blocked by ARMR today1
Working exploit published1
Jun 200
Jul 201
Mitigation candidate1
High1
not blocked1
Working exploit published1
Aug 200
Sep 200
Oct 200
Nov 200
Dec 200
Jan 210
Feb 210
Mar 210
Apr 210
May 210
Jun 210
Jul 211
No exploit published1
Medium1
not blocked1
Forecast only1
May 20Jul 20Sep 20Nov 20Jan 21Mar 21May 21Jul 21
| CVE | Severity | Published▾ | Status | Exploitation | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2021-33037 | Medium | 2021-07-12 | No exploit published | Forecast only | Apache Tomcat 10.0.0-M1 to 10.0.6, 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.46 and 8.5.0 to 8.5.66 did not correctly parse the HTTP transfer-encoding request header in some circumstances leading to the possibility to request smuggling when used with a reverse proxy. Specifically: - Tomcat incorrectly ignored the transfer encoding header if the client declared it would only accept an HTTP/1.0 response; - Tomcat honoured the identify encoding; and - Tomcat did not ensure that, if present, the chunked encoding was the final encoding. |
| CVE-2020-13935 | High | 2020-07-14 | Mitigation candidate | Working exploit published | The payload length in a WebSocket frame was not correctly validated in Apache Tomcat 10.0.0-M1 to 10.0.0-M6, 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.36, 8.5.0 to 8.5.56 and 7.0.27 to 7.0.104. Invalid payload lengths could trigger an infinite loop. Multiple requests with invalid payload lengths could lead to a denial of service. |
| CVE-2020-9484 | High | 2020-05-20 | Protected by Waratek | Working exploit published | When using Apache Tomcat versions 10.0.0-M1 to 10.0.0-M4, 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.34, 8.5.0 to 8.5.54 and 7.0.0 to 7.0.103 if a) an attacker is able to control the contents and name of a file on the server; and b) the server is configured to use the PersistenceManager with a FileStore; and c) the PersistenceManager is configured with sessionAttributeValueClassNameFilter="null" (the default unless a SecurityManager is used) or a sufficiently lax filter to allow the attacker provided object to be deserialized; and d) the attacker knows the relative file path from the storage location used by FileStore to the file the attacker has control over; then, using a specifically crafted request, the attacker will be able to trigger remote code execution via deserialization of the file under their control. Note that all of conditions a) to d) must be true for the attack to succeed. |