Overview 7 matches · 0 in Waratek scope · 0 protected · 0 exploited · 0 CISA KEV · 0 public PoC
7matches
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
2
28.6%
Not applicable
5
71.4%
Withdrawn CVE
0
0.0%
blocked by ARMR today
0
0.0%
partly blocked
0
0.0%
not blocked
7
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
7
100.0%
No public exploit
0
0.0%
split by
peak 3 / quarter
Q2 14Q3 14Q4 14Q1 15Q2 15Q3 15Q4 15Q1 16Q2 16Q3 16
| CVE | Severity | Published▾ | Status | Exploitation | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2016-5387 | High | 2016-07-19 | Outside Waratek scope | Forecast only | The Apache HTTP Server through 2.4.23 follows RFC 3875 section 4.1.18 and therefore does not protect applications from the presence of untrusted client data in the HTTP_PROXY environment variable, which might allow remote attackers to redirect an application's outbound HTTP traffic to an arbitrary proxy server via a crafted Proxy header in an HTTP request, aka an "httpoxy" issue. NOTE: the vendor states "This mitigation has been assigned the identifier CVE-2016-5387"; in other words, this is not a CVE ID for a vulnerability. |
| CVE-2016-1286 | High | 2016-03-09 | Not applicable | Forecast only | named in ISC BIND 9.x before 9.9.8-P4 and 9.10.x before 9.10.3-P4 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (assertion failure and daemon exit) via a crafted signature record for a DNAME record, related to db.c and resolver.c. |
| CVE-2016-1285 | Medium | 2016-03-09 | Not applicable | Forecast only | named in ISC BIND 9.x before 9.9.8-P4 and 9.10.x before 9.10.3-P4 does not properly handle DNAME records when parsing fetch reply messages, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (assertion failure and daemon exit) via a malformed packet to the rndc (aka control channel) interface, related to alist.c and sexpr.c. |
| CVE-2015-2808 | Low | 2015-04-01 | Outside Waratek scope | Forecast only | The RC4 algorithm, as used in the TLS protocol and SSL protocol, does not properly combine state data with key data during the initialization phase, which makes it easier for remote attackers to conduct plaintext-recovery attacks against the initial bytes of a stream by sniffing network traffic that occasionally relies on keys affected by the Invariance Weakness, and then using a brute-force approach involving LSB values, aka the "Bar Mitzvah" issue. |
| CVE-2014-3470 | Medium | 2014-06-05 | Not applicable | Forecast only | The ssl3_send_client_key_exchange function in s3_clnt.c in OpenSSL before 0.9.8za, 1.0.0 before 1.0.0m, and 1.0.1 before 1.0.1h, when an anonymous ECDH cipher suite is used, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (NULL pointer dereference and client crash) by triggering a NULL certificate value. |
| CVE-2014-0221 | Medium | 2014-06-05 | Not applicable | Forecast only | The dtls1_get_message_fragment function in d1_both.c in OpenSSL before 0.9.8za, 1.0.0 before 1.0.0m, and 1.0.1 before 1.0.1h allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (recursion and client crash) via a DTLS hello message in an invalid DTLS handshake. |
| CVE-2014-0195 | Medium | 2014-06-05 | Not applicable | Forecast only | The dtls1_reassemble_fragment function in d1_both.c in OpenSSL before 0.9.8za, 1.0.0 before 1.0.0m, and 1.0.1 before 1.0.1h does not properly validate fragment lengths in DTLS ClientHello messages, which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service (buffer overflow and application crash) via a long non-initial fragment. |