Overview 9 matches · 1 protected · 1 exploited · 1 CISA KEV · 6 public PoC · 3 EPSS ≥ 0.5
Protected by Waratek
1
11.1%
Rule in development
0
0.0%
Mitigation candidate
5
55.6%
No exploit published
3
33.3%
blocked by ARMR today
1
11.1%
partly blocked
0
0.0%
not blocked
8
88.9%
not established
0
0.0%
unrecorded
0
0.0%
Exploited
1
11.1%
Working exploit published
5
55.6%
Proof of concept only
0
0.0%
Forecast only
0
0.0%
No public exploit
3
33.3%
split by
peak 4 / month
Jan 124
Protected by Waratek1
Mitigation candidate3
Critical1
Medium3
blocked by ARMR today1
not blocked3
Exploited1
Working exploit published3
Feb 122
Mitigation candidate2
Medium2
not blocked2
Working exploit published2
Mar 121
No exploit published1
High1
not blocked1
No public exploit1
Apr 120
May 120
Jun 120
Jul 120
Aug 120
Sep 122
No exploit published2
Medium2
not blocked2
No public exploit2
Jan 12Feb 12Mar 12Apr 12May 12Jun 12Jul 12Aug 12Sep 12
| CVE | Severity | Published▾ | Status | Exploitation | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2012-4387 | Medium | 2012-09-05 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Apache Struts 2.0.0 through 2.3.4 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (CPU consumption) via a long parameter name, which is processed as an OGNL expression. |
| CVE-2012-4386 | Medium | 2012-09-05 | No exploit published | No public exploit | The token check mechanism in Apache Struts 2.0.0 through 2.3.4 does not properly validate the token name configuration parameter, which allows remote attackers to perform cross-site request forgery (CSRF) attacks by setting the token name configuration parameter to a session attribute. |
| CVE-2012-0838 | High | 2012-03-02 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Apache Struts 2 before 2.2.3.1 evaluates a string as an OGNL expression during the handling of a conversion error, which allows remote attackers to modify run-time data values, and consequently execute arbitrary code, via invalid input to a field. |
| CVE-2012-1007 | Medium | 2012-02-07 | Mitigation candidate | Working exploit published | Multiple cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities in Apache Struts 1.3.10 allow remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via (1) the name parameter to struts-examples/upload/upload-submit.do, or the message parameter to (2) struts-cookbook/processSimple.do or (3) struts-cookbook/processDyna.do. |
| CVE-2012-1006 | Medium | 2012-02-07 | Mitigation candidate | Working exploit published | Multiple cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities in Apache Struts 2.0.14 and 2.2.3 allow remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the (1) name or (2) lastName parameter to struts2-showcase/person/editPerson.action, or the (3) clientName parameter to struts2-rest-showcase/orders. |
| CVE-2012-0393 | Medium | 2012-01-08 | Mitigation candidate | Working exploit published | The ParameterInterceptor component in Apache Struts before 2.3.1.1 does not prevent access to public constructors, which allows remote attackers to create or overwrite arbitrary files via a crafted parameter that triggers the creation of a Java object. |
| CVE-2012-0392 | Medium | 2012-01-08 | Mitigation candidate | Working exploit published | The CookieInterceptor component in Apache Struts before 2.3.1.1 does not use the parameter-name whitelist, which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands via a crafted HTTP Cookie header that triggers Java code execution through a static method. |
| CVE-2012-0391 | Critical | 2012-01-08 | Protected by Waratek | Exploited | The ExceptionDelegator component in Apache Struts before 2.2.3.1 interprets parameter values as OGNL expressions during certain exception handling for mismatched data types of properties, which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary Java code via a crafted parameter. |
| CVE-2011-5057 | Medium | 2012-01-08 | Mitigation candidate | Working exploit published | Apache Struts 2.3.1.2 and earlier, 2.3.19-2.3.23, provides interfaces that do not properly restrict access to collections such as the session and request collections, which might allow remote attackers to modify run-time data values via a crafted parameter to an application that implements an affected interface, as demonstrated by the SessionAware, RequestAware, ApplicationAware, ServletRequestAware, ServletResponseAware, and ParameterAware interfaces. NOTE: the vendor disputes the significance of this report because of an "easy work-around in existing apps by configuring the interceptor." |