Overview 6 matches · 1 in Waratek scope · 0 protected · 3 exploited · 0 CISA KEV · 4 EPSS ≥ 0.5
Protected by Waratek
0
0.0%
Rule in development
0
0.0%
Mitigation candidate
1
16.7%
No exploit published
0
0.0%
Outside Waratek scope
4
66.7%
Not applicable
1
16.7%
Withdrawn CVE
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
3
50.0%
Working exploit published
3
50.0%
Proof of concept only
0
0.0%
Forecast only
0
0.0%
No public exploit
0
0.0%
split by
peak 3 / month
Nov 091
Not applicable1
Critical1
not blocked1
Exploited1
Dec 090
Jan 100
Feb 100
Mar 100
Apr 100
May 100
Jun 100
Jul 100
Aug 100
Sep 100
Oct 103
Outside Waratek scope3
High2
Medium1
not blocked3
Exploited1
Working exploit published2
Nov 100
Dec 100
Jan 110
Feb 112
Mitigation candidate1
Outside Waratek scope1
High1
Medium1
not blocked2
Exploited1
Working exploit published1
Dec 09Feb 10Apr 10Jun 10Aug 10Oct 10Dec 10Feb 11
| CVE | Severity | Published▾ | Status | Exploitation | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2010-4476 | Medium | 2011-02-17 | Mitigation candidate | Working exploit published | The Double.parseDouble method in Java Runtime Environment (JRE) in Oracle Java SE and Java for Business 6 Update 23 and earlier, 5.0 Update 27 and earlier, and 1.4.2_29 and earlier, as used in OpenJDK, Apache, JBossweb, and other products, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service via a crafted string that triggers an infinite loop of estimations during conversion to a double-precision binary floating-point number, as demonstrated using 2.2250738585072012e-308. |
| CVE-2010-4452 | High | 2011-02-17 | Outside Waratek scope | Exploited | Unspecified vulnerability in the Deployment component in Java Runtime Environment (JRE) in Oracle Java SE and Java for Business 6 Update 23 and earlier allows remote untrusted Java Web Start applications and untrusted Java applets to affect confidentiality, integrity, and availability via unknown vectors. |
| CVE-2010-3573 | Medium | 2010-10-19 | Outside Waratek scope | Working exploit published | Unspecified vulnerability in the Networking component in Oracle Java SE and Java for Business 6 Update 21 and 5.0 Update 25 allows remote attackers to affect confidentiality, integrity, and availability via unknown vectors. NOTE: the previous information was obtained from the October 2010 CPU. Oracle has not commented on claims from a reliable downstream vendor that this is related to missing validation of request headers in the HttpURLConnection class when they are set by applets, which allows remote attackers to bypass the intended security policy. |
| CVE-2010-3563 | High | 2010-10-19 | Outside Waratek scope | Working exploit published | Unspecified vulnerability in the Deployment component in Oracle Java SE and Java for Business 6 Update 21 allows remote attackers to affect confidentiality, integrity, and availability via unknown vectors. NOTE: the previous information was obtained from the October 2010 CPU. Oracle has not commented on claims from a reliable researcher that this is related to "how Web Start retrieves security policies," BasicServiceImpl, and forged policies that bypass sandbox restrictions. |
| CVE-2010-3552 | High | 2010-10-19 | Outside Waratek scope | Exploited | Unspecified vulnerability in the New Java Plug-in component in Oracle Java SE and Java for Business 6 Update 21 allows remote attackers to affect confidentiality, integrity, and availability via unknown vectors. |
| CVE-2009-3555 | Critical | 2009-11-09 | Not applicable | Exploited | The TLS protocol, and the SSL protocol 3.0 and possibly earlier, as used in Microsoft Internet Information Services (IIS) 7.0, mod_ssl in the Apache HTTP Server 2.2.14 and earlier, OpenSSL before 0.9.8l, GnuTLS 2.8.5 and earlier, Mozilla Network Security Services (NSS) 3.12.4 and earlier, multiple Cisco products, and other products, does not properly associate renegotiation handshakes with an existing connection, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to insert data into HTTPS sessions, and possibly other types of sessions protected by TLS or SSL, by sending an unauthenticated request that is processed retroactively by a server in a post-renegotiation context, related to a "plaintext injection" attack, aka the "Project Mogul" issue. |