WaratekVRT Sign in
Reset
More filters (1)
Columns
Including CVEs outside Waratek scope✕Product hci compute node✕
Overview 106 matches · 9 in Waratek scope · 3 protected · 2 exploited · 1 CISA KEV · 8 public PoC · 7 EPSS ≥ 0.5
106matches 9in Waratek scope8.5% 3protected2.8% 2exploited1.9% 1CISA KEV0.9% 8public PoC7.5% 7EPSS ≥ 0.56.6%
Protected by Waratek 3 2.8% Rule in development 0 0.0% Mitigation candidate 1 0.9% No exploit published 5 4.7% Outside Waratek scope 54 50.9% Not applicable 43 40.6% Withdrawn CVE 0 0.0%
Critical 6 5.7% High 45 42.5% Medium 51 48.1% Low 4 3.8% None 0 0.0% Unknown 0 0.0%
blocked by ARMR today 3 2.8% partly blocked 0 0.0% not blocked 103 97.2% not established 0 0.0% unrecorded 0 0.0%
Exploited 2 1.9% Working exploit published 1 0.9% Proof of concept only 14 13.2% Forecast only 1 0.9% No public exploit 88 83.0%
split by peak 25 / year
Not applicable: 43Outside Waratek scope: 54No exploit published: 5Mitigation candidate: 1Protected by Waratek: 3 Low: 4Medium: 51High: 45Critical: 6 not blocked: 103blocked by ARMR today: 3 No public exploit: 88Forecast only: 1Proof of concept only: 14Working exploit published: 1Exploited: 2
20181 Outside Waratek scope1 Medium1 not blocked1 Working exploit published1 201916 Outside Waratek scope16 Critical1 High10 Medium4 Low1 not blocked16 Exploited1 No public exploit15 202025 Outside Waratek scope17 Not applicable8 Critical1 High11 Medium12 Low1 not blocked25 Proof of concept only2 No public exploit23 202122 Protected by Waratek1 Outside Waratek scope8 Not applicable13 High4 Medium17 Low1 blocked by ARMR today1 not blocked21 Proof of concept only2 Forecast only1 No public exploit19 202224 Protected by Waratek2 Mitigation candidate1 No exploit published5 Outside Waratek scope5 Not applicable11 Critical1 High13 Medium9 Low1 blocked by ARMR today2 not blocked22 Proof of concept only6 No public exploit18 20232 Not applicable2 High1 Medium1 not blocked2 Proof of concept only2 202410 Outside Waratek scope4 Not applicable6 Critical2 High3 Medium5 not blocked10 Exploited1 Proof of concept only2 No public exploit7 20256 Outside Waratek scope3 Not applicable3 Critical1 High3 Medium2 not blocked6 No public exploit6
20182019202020212022202320242025
106 matches Sign in to download these CVEs as CSV or JSON, or to follow them in a feed. ‹ prev page 2 of 2 next ›
CVE Severity Published▾ Status Exploitation Description
CVE-2019-18805 Critical 2019-11-07 Outside Waratek scope No public exploit An issue was discovered in net/ipv4/sysctl_net_ipv4.c in the Linux kernel before 5.0.11. There is a net/ipv4/tcp_input.c signed integer overflow in tcp_ack_update_rtt() when userspace writes a very large integer to /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_min_rtt_wlen, leading to a denial of service or possibly unspecified other impact, aka CID-19fad20d15a6.
CVE-2019-13272 High 2019-07-17 Outside Waratek scope Exploited In the Linux kernel before 5.1.17, ptrace_link in kernel/ptrace.c mishandles the recording of the credentials of a process that wants to create a ptrace relationship, which allows local users to obtain root access by leveraging certain scenarios with a parent-child process relationship, where a parent drops privileges and calls execve (potentially allowing control by an attacker). One contributing factor is an object lifetime issue (which can also cause a panic). Another contributing factor is incorrect marking of a ptrace relationship as privileged, which is exploitable through (for example) Polkit's pkexec helper with PTRACE_TRACEME. NOTE: SELinux deny_ptrace might be a usable workaround in some environments.
CVE-2019-11815 High 2019-05-08 Outside Waratek scope No public exploit An issue was discovered in rds_tcp_kill_sock in net/rds/tcp.c in the Linux kernel before 5.0.8. There is a race condition leading to a use-after-free, related to net namespace cleanup.
CVE-2018-20836 High 2019-05-07 Outside Waratek scope No public exploit An issue was discovered in the Linux kernel before 4.20. There is a race condition in smp_task_timedout() and smp_task_done() in drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_expander.c, leading to a use-after-free.
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).
CVE-2017-5715 Medium 2018-01-04 Outside Waratek scope Working exploit published Systems with microprocessors utilizing speculative execution and indirect branch prediction may allow unauthorized disclosure of information to an attacker with local user access via a side-channel analysis.
‹ prev page 2 of 2 next ›