Overview 134 matches · 0 in Waratek scope · 0 protected · 7 exploited · 7 CISA KEV · 22 public PoC · 7 EPSS ≥ 0.5
134matches
0in Waratek scope0.0%
0protected0.0%
7exploited5.2%
7CISA KEV5.2%
22public PoC16.4%
7EPSS ≥ 0.55.2%
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
0.7%
Not applicable
133
99.3%
Withdrawn CVE
0
0.0%
blocked by ARMR today
0
0.0%
partly blocked
0
0.0%
not blocked
134
100.0%
not established
0
0.0%
unrecorded
0
0.0%
split by
peak 15 / year
19981
Not applicable1
High1
not blocked1
No public exploit1
19993
Not applicable3
High1
Medium1
Low1
not blocked3
Working exploit published1
No public exploit2
200015
Not applicable15
High8
Medium7
not blocked15
Working exploit published4
No public exploit11
200112
Not applicable12
High4
Medium8
not blocked12
Working exploit published2
No public exploit10
20024
Not applicable4
High2
Medium2
not blocked4
No public exploit4
20031
Not applicable1
Medium1
not blocked1
Working exploit published1
20048
Not applicable8
High6
Medium2
not blocked8
No public exploit8
20055
Not applicable5
High3
Medium1
Low1
not blocked5
Working exploit published1
No public exploit4
20062
Not applicable2
High1
Medium1
not blocked2
No public exploit2
20076
Not applicable6
High6
not blocked6
No public exploit6
20083
Not applicable3
High1
Medium2
not blocked3
Working exploit published1
No public exploit2
20095
Not applicable5
High1
Medium4
not blocked5
Working exploit published3
No public exploit2
20100
20112
Not applicable2
High1
Low1
not blocked2
No public exploit2
20122
Not applicable2
Medium2
not blocked2
No public exploit2
20132
Not applicable2
Low2
not blocked2
No public exploit2
201410
Not applicable10
Critical2
High4
Medium4
not blocked10
Exploited2
No public exploit8
20150
20160
20170
20180
201911
Not applicable11
Critical1
High7
Medium3
not blocked11
Working exploit published1
No public exploit10
20208
Not applicable8
High4
Medium4
not blocked8
No public exploit8
20216
Outside Waratek scope1
Not applicable5
High4
Medium2
not blocked6
Proof of concept only2
No public exploit4
20228
Not applicable8
High6
Medium1
Low1
not blocked8
No public exploit8
20233
Not applicable3
High3
not blocked3
Proof of concept only1
No public exploit2
20245
Not applicable5
High4
Medium1
not blocked5
Exploited1
No public exploit4
20258
Not applicable8
Critical1
High3
Medium4
not blocked8
No public exploit8
20264
Not applicable4
Critical4
not blocked4
Exploited4
1999200220052008201120142017202020232026
| CVE | Severity | Published▾ | Status | Exploitation | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2002-1623 | Medium | 2002-12-31 | Not applicable | No public exploit | The design of the Internet Key Exchange (IKE) protocol, when using Aggressive Mode for shared secret authentication, does not encrypt initiator or responder identities during negotiation, which may allow remote attackers to determine valid usernames by (1) monitoring responses before the password is supplied or (2) sniffing, as originally reported for FireWall-1 SecuRemote. |
| CVE-2002-0428 | High | 2002-08-12 | Not applicable | No public exploit | Check Point FireWall-1 SecuRemote/SecuClient 4.0 and 4.1 allows clients to bypass the "authentication timeout" by modifying the to_expire or expire values in the client's users.C configuration file. |
| CVE-2001-1171 | High | 2002-04-01 | Not applicable | No public exploit | Check Point Firewall-1 3.0b through 4.0 SP1 follows symlinks and creates a world-writable temporary .cpp file when compiling Policy rules, which could allow local users to gain privileges or modify the firewall policy. |
| CVE-2001-1499 | Medium | 2001-12-31 | Not applicable | No public exploit | Check Point VPN-1 4.1SP4 using SecuRemote returns different error messages for valid and invalid users, with prompts that vary depending on the authentication method being used, which makes it easier for remote attackers to conduct brute force attacks. |
| CVE-2001-1431 | Medium | 2001-10-08 | Not applicable | No public exploit | Nokia Firewall Appliances running IPSO 3.3 and VPN-1/FireWall-1 4.1 Service Pack 3, IPSO 3.4 and VPN-1/FireWall-1 4.1 Service Pack 4, and IPSO 3.4 or IPSO 3.4.1 and VPN-1/FireWall-1 4.1 Service Pack 5, when SYN Defender is configured in Active Gateway mode, does not properly rewrite the third packet of a TCP three-way handshake to use the NAT IP address, which allows remote attackers to gain sensitive information. |
| CVE-2001-0940 | High | 2001-09-21 | Not applicable | No public exploit | Buffer overflow in the GUI authentication code of Check Point VPN-1/FireWall-1 Management Server 4.0 and 4.1 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a long user name. |
| CVE-2001-1102 | Medium | 2001-09-08 | Not applicable | No public exploit | Check Point FireWall-1 3.0b through 4.1 for Solaris allows local users to overwrite arbitrary files via a symlink attack on temporary policy files that end in a .cpp extension, which are set world-writable. |
| CVE-2001-1101 | Medium | 2001-09-08 | Not applicable | No public exploit | The Log Viewer function in the Check Point FireWall-1 GUI for Solaris 3.0b through 4.1 SP2 does not check for the existence of '.log' files when saving files, which allows (1) remote authenticated users to overwrite arbitrary files ending in '.log', or (2) local users to overwrite arbitrary files via a symlink attack. |
| CVE-2000-1201 | Medium | 2001-08-31 | Not applicable | No public exploit | Check Point FireWall-1 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (high CPU) via a flood of packets to port 264. |
| CVE-2001-0682 | Medium | 2001-08-29 | Not applicable | No public exploit | ZoneAlarm and ZoneAlarm Pro allows a local attacker to cause a denial of service by running a trojan to initialize a ZoneAlarm mutex object which prevents ZoneAlarm from starting. |
| CVE-2001-1303 | Medium | 2001-07-18 | Not applicable | Working exploit published | The default configuration of SecuRemote for Check Point Firewall-1 allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive configuration information for the protected network without authentication. |
| CVE-2001-1176 | High | 2001-07-12 | Not applicable | No public exploit | Format string vulnerability in Check Point VPN-1/FireWall-1 4.1 allows a remote authenticated firewall administrator to execute arbitrary code via format strings in the control connection. |
| CVE-2001-1158 | High | 2001-07-09 | Not applicable | No public exploit | Check Point VPN-1/FireWall-1 4.1 base.def contains a default macro, accept_fw1_rdp, which can allow remote attackers to bypass intended restrictions with forged RDP (internal protocol) headers to UDP port 259 of arbitrary hosts. |
| CVE-2001-0182 | Medium | 2001-03-26 | Not applicable | No public exploit | FireWall-1 4.1 with a limited-IP license allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service by sending a large number of spoofed IP packets with various source addresses to the inside interface, which floods the console with warning messages and consumes CPU resources. |
| CVE-2001-0082 | High | 2001-02-12 | Not applicable | Working exploit published | Check Point VPN-1/FireWall-1 4.1 SP2 with Fastmode enabled allows remote attackers to bypass access restrictions via malformed, fragmented packets. |
| CVE-2000-1037 | High | 2000-12-11 | Not applicable | Working exploit published | Check Point Firewall-1 session agent 3.0 through 4.1 generates different error messages for invalid user names versus invalid passwords, which allows remote attackers to determine valid usernames and guess a password via a brute force attack. |
| CVE-2000-1032 | Medium | 2000-12-11 | Not applicable | No public exploit | The client authentication interface for Check Point Firewall-1 4.0 and earlier generates different error messages for invalid usernames versus invalid passwords, which allows remote attackers to identify valid usernames on the firewall. |
| CVE-2000-0813 | Medium | 2000-11-14 | Not applicable | No public exploit | Check Point VPN-1/FireWall-1 4.1 and earlier allows remote attackers to redirect FTP connections to other servers ("FTP Bounce") via invalid FTP commands that are processed improperly by FireWall-1, aka "FTP Connection Enforcement Bypass." |
| CVE-2000-0809 | Medium | 2000-11-14 | Not applicable | No public exploit | Buffer overflow in Getkey in the protocol checker in the inter-module communication mechanism in Check Point VPN-1/FireWall-1 4.1 and earlier allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service. |
| CVE-2000-0808 | High | 2000-11-14 | Not applicable | No public exploit | The seed generation mechanism in the inter-module S/Key authentication mechanism in Check Point VPN-1/FireWall-1 4.1 and earlier allows remote attackers to bypass authentication via a brute force attack, aka "One-time (s/key) Password Authentication." |
| CVE-2000-0807 | High | 2000-11-14 | Not applicable | No public exploit | The OPSEC communications authentication mechanism (fwn1) in Check Point VPN-1/FireWall-1 4.1 and earlier allows remote attackers to spoof connections, aka the "OPSEC Authentication Vulnerability." |
| CVE-2000-0806 | Medium | 2000-11-14 | Not applicable | No public exploit | The inter-module authentication mechanism (fwa1) in Check Point VPN-1/FireWall-1 4.1 and earlier may allow remote attackers to conduct a denial of service, aka "Inter-module Communications Bypass." |
| CVE-2000-0805 | High | 2000-11-14 | Not applicable | No public exploit | Check Point VPN-1/FireWall-1 4.1 and earlier improperly retransmits encapsulated FWS packets, even if they do not come from a valid FWZ client, aka "Retransmission of Encapsulated Packets." |
| CVE-2000-0804 | High | 2000-11-14 | Not applicable | No public exploit | Check Point VPN-1/FireWall-1 4.1 and earlier allows remote attackers to bypass the directionality check via fragmented TCP connection requests or reopening closed TCP connection requests, aka "One-way Connection Enforcement Bypass." |
| CVE-2000-0779 | High | 2000-10-20 | Not applicable | No public exploit | Checkpoint Firewall-1 with the RSH/REXEC setting enabled allows remote attackers to bypass access restrictions and connect to a RSH/REXEC client via malformed connection requests. |
| CVE-2000-0582 | Medium | 2000-06-30 | Not applicable | Working exploit published | Check Point FireWall-1 4.0 and 4.1 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service by sending a stream of invalid commands (such as binary zeros) to the SMTP Security Server proxy. |
| CVE-2000-0482 | Medium | 2000-06-06 | Not applicable | Working exploit published | Check Point Firewall-1 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service by sending a large number of malformed fragmented IP packets. |
| CVE-2000-0181 | Medium | 2000-03-11 | Not applicable | No public exploit | Firewall-1 3.0 and 4.0 leaks packets with private IP address information, which could allow remote attackers to determine the real IP address of the host that is making the connection. |
| CVE-2000-0150 | High | 2000-02-12 | Not applicable | No public exploit | Check Point Firewall-1 allows remote attackers to bypass port access restrictions on an FTP server by forcing it to send malicious packets that Firewall-1 misinterprets as a valid 227 response to a client's PASV attempt. |
| CVE-2000-0116 | High | 2000-01-29 | Not applicable | Working exploit published | Firewall-1 does not properly filter script tags, which allows remote attackers to bypass the "Strip Script Tags" restriction by including an extra < in front of the SCRIPT tag. |
| CVE-1999-0895 | High | 1999-10-20 | Not applicable | No public exploit | Firewall-1 does not properly restrict access to LDAP attributes. |
| CVE-1999-0675 | Medium | 1999-08-09 | Not applicable | No public exploit | Check Point FireWall-1 can be subjected to a denial of service via UDP packets that are sent through VPN-1 to port 0 of a host. |
| CVE-1999-0770 | Low | 1999-07-29 | Not applicable | Working exploit published | Firewall-1 sets a long timeout for connections that begin with ACK or other packets except SYN, allowing an attacker to conduct a denial of service via a large number of connection attempts to unresponsive systems. |
| CVE-1999-1204 | High | 1998-05-11 | Not applicable | No public exploit | Check Point Firewall-1 does not properly handle certain restricted keywords (e.g., Mail, auth, time) in user-defined objects, which could produce a rule with a default "ANY" address and result in access to more systems than intended by the administrator. |