Overview 4 matches · 0 in Waratek scope · 0 protected · 0 exploited · 0 CISA KEV · 0 public PoC · 0 EPSS ≥ 0.5
4matches
0in Waratek scope0.0%
0protected0.0%
0exploited0.0%
0CISA KEV0.0%
0public PoC0.0%
0EPSS ≥ 0.50.0%
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
25.0%
Not applicable
3
75.0%
Withdrawn CVE
0
0.0%
blocked by ARMR today
0
0.0%
partly blocked
0
0.0%
not blocked
4
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
0
0.0%
No public exploit
4
100.0%
split by
peak 1 / quarter
Q1 191
Outside Waratek scope1
Medium1
not blocked1
No public exploit1
Q2 191
Not applicable1
Medium1
not blocked1
No public exploit1
Q3 190
Q4 190
Q1 201
Not applicable1
Medium1
not blocked1
No public exploit1
Q2 200
Q3 200
Q4 200
Q1 210
Q2 210
Q3 210
Q4 210
Q1 220
Q2 220
Q3 220
Q4 221
Not applicable1
Medium1
not blocked1
No public exploit1
Q2 19Q4 19Q2 20Q4 20Q2 21Q4 21Q2 22Q4 22
| CVE | Severity | Published▾ | Status | Exploitation | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2022-2188 | Medium | 2022-11-07 | Not applicable | No public exploit | Privilege escalation vulnerability in DXL Broker for Windows prior to 6.0.0.280 allows local users to gain elevated privileges by exploiting weak directory controls in the logs directory. This can lead to a denial-of-service attack on the DXL Broker. |
| CVE-2020-7252 | Medium | 2020-02-17 | Not applicable | No public exploit | Unquoted service executable path in DXL Broker in McAfee Data eXchange Layer (DXL) Framework 6.0.0 and earlier allows local users to cause a denial of service and malicious file execution via carefully crafted and named executable files. |
| CVE-2019-3612 | Medium | 2019-04-10 | Not applicable | No public exploit | Information Disclosure vulnerability in McAfee DXL Platform and TIE Server in DXL prior to 5.0.1 HF2 and TIE prior to 2.3.1 HF1 allows Authenticated users to view sensitive information in plain text via the GUI or command line. |
| CVE-2019-1559 | Medium | 2019-02-27 | Outside Waratek scope | No public exploit | If an application encounters a fatal protocol error and then calls SSL_shutdown() twice (once to send a close_notify, and once to receive one) then OpenSSL can respond differently to the calling application if a 0 byte record is received with invalid padding compared to if a 0 byte record is received with an invalid MAC. If the application then behaves differently based on that in a way that is detectable to the remote peer, then this amounts to a padding oracle that could be used to decrypt data. In order for this to be exploitable "non-stitched" ciphersuites must be in use. Stitched ciphersuites are optimised implementations of certain commonly used ciphersuites. Also the application must call SSL_shutdown() twice even if a protocol error has occurred (applications should not do this but some do anyway). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2r (Affected 1.0.2-1.0.2q). |