Overview 16 matches · 0 in Waratek scope · 0 protected · 1 exploited · 0 CISA KEV · 2 public PoC · 3 EPSS ≥ 0.5
16matches
0in Waratek scope0.0%
0protected0.0%
1exploited6.2%
0CISA KEV0.0%
2public PoC12.5%
3EPSS ≥ 0.518.8%
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
16
100.0%
Not applicable
0
0.0%
Withdrawn CVE
0
0.0%
blocked by ARMR today
0
0.0%
partly blocked
0
0.0%
not blocked
16
100.0%
not established
0
0.0%
unrecorded
0
0.0%
split by
peak 7 / year
20141
Outside Waratek scope1
High1
not blocked1
Exploited1
20150
20161
Outside Waratek scope1
High1
not blocked1
Proof of concept only1
20170
20180
20192
Outside Waratek scope2
Critical1
High1
not blocked2
No public exploit2
20207
Outside Waratek scope7
Critical2
High4
Medium1
not blocked7
Working exploit published1
No public exploit6
20213
Outside Waratek scope3
Critical2
Medium1
not blocked3
Proof of concept only1
No public exploit2
20221
Outside Waratek scope1
High1
not blocked1
Proof of concept only1
20231
Outside Waratek scope1
Medium1
not blocked1
Proof of concept only1
2014201520162017201820192020202120222023
| CVE | Severity | Published▾ | Status | Exploitation | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2023-27043 | Medium | 2023-04-19 | Outside Waratek scope | Proof of concept only | The email module of Python through 3.11.3 incorrectly parses e-mail addresses that contain a special character. The wrong portion of an RFC2822 header is identified as the value of the addr-spec. In some applications, an attacker can bypass a protection mechanism in which application access is granted only after verifying receipt of e-mail to a specific domain (e.g., only @company.example.com addresses may be used for signup). This occurs in email/_parseaddr.py in recent versions of Python. |
| CVE-2018-25032 | High | 2022-03-25 | Outside Waratek scope | Proof of concept only | zlib before 1.2.12 allows memory corruption when deflating (i.e., when compressing) if the input has many distant matches. |
| CVE-2021-29921 | Critical | 2021-05-06 | Outside Waratek scope | No public exploit | In Python before 3,9,5, the ipaddress library mishandles leading zero characters in the octets of an IP address string. This (in some situations) allows attackers to bypass access control that is based on IP addresses. |
| CVE-2021-23336 | Medium | 2021-02-15 | Outside Waratek scope | No public exploit | The package python/cpython from 0 and before 3.6.13, from 3.7.0 and before 3.7.10, from 3.8.0 and before 3.8.8, from 3.9.0 and before 3.9.2 are vulnerable to Web Cache Poisoning via urllib.parse.parse_qsl and urllib.parse.parse_qs by using a vector called parameter cloaking. When the attacker can separate query parameters using a semicolon (;), they can cause a difference in the interpretation of the request between the proxy (running with default configuration) and the server. This can result in malicious requests being cached as completely safe ones, as the proxy would usually not see the semicolon as a separator, and therefore would not include it in a cache key of an unkeyed parameter. |
| CVE-2021-3177 | Critical | 2021-01-19 | Outside Waratek scope | Proof of concept only | Python 3.x through 3.9.1 has a buffer overflow in PyCArg_repr in _ctypes/callproc.c, which may lead to remote code execution in certain Python applications that accept floating-point numbers as untrusted input, as demonstrated by a 1e300 argument to c_double.from_param. This occurs because sprintf is used unsafely. |
| CVE-2020-27619 | Critical | 2020-10-22 | Outside Waratek scope | No public exploit | In Python 3 through 3.9.0, the Lib/test/multibytecodec_support.py CJK codec tests call eval() on content retrieved via HTTP. |
| CVE-2020-26116 | High | 2020-09-27 | Outside Waratek scope | No public exploit | http.client in Python 3.x before 3.5.10, 3.6.x before 3.6.12, 3.7.x before 3.7.9, and 3.8.x before 3.8.5 allows CRLF injection if the attacker controls the HTTP request method, as demonstrated by inserting CR and LF control characters in the first argument of HTTPConnection.request. |
| CVE-2019-20907 | High | 2020-07-13 | Outside Waratek scope | No public exploit | In Lib/tarfile.py in Python through 3.8.3, an attacker is able to craft a TAR archive leading to an infinite loop when opened by tarfile.open, because _proc_pax lacks header validation. |
| CVE-2020-15523 | High | 2020-07-04 | Outside Waratek scope | No public exploit | In Python 3.6 through 3.6.10, 3.7 through 3.7.8, 3.8 through 3.8.4rc1, and 3.9 through 3.9.0b4 on Windows, a Trojan horse python3.dll might be used in cases where CPython is embedded in a native application. This occurs because python3X.dll may use an invalid search path for python3.dll loading (after Py_SetPath has been used). NOTE: this issue CANNOT occur when using python.exe from a standard (non-embedded) Python installation on Windows. |
| CVE-2020-14422 | Medium | 2020-06-18 | Outside Waratek scope | No public exploit | Lib/ipaddress.py in Python through 3.8.3 improperly computes hash values in the IPv4Interface and IPv6Interface classes, which might allow a remote attacker to cause a denial of service if an application is affected by the performance of a dictionary containing IPv4Interface or IPv6Interface objects, and this attacker can cause many dictionary entries to be created. This is fixed in: v3.5.10, v3.5.10rc1; v3.6.12; v3.7.9; v3.8.4, v3.8.4rc1, v3.8.5, v3.8.6, v3.8.6rc1; v3.9.0, v3.9.0b4, v3.9.0b5, v3.9.0rc1, v3.9.0rc2. |
| CVE-2014-4650 | Critical | 2020-02-20 | Outside Waratek scope | Working exploit published | The CGIHTTPServer module in Python 2.7.5 and 3.3.4 does not properly handle URLs in which URL encoding is used for path separators, which allows remote attackers to read script source code or conduct directory traversal attacks and execute unintended code via a crafted character sequence, as demonstrated by a %2f separator. |
| CVE-2019-9674 | High | 2020-02-04 | Outside Waratek scope | No public exploit | Lib/zipfile.py in Python through 3.7.2 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (resource consumption) via a ZIP bomb. |
| CVE-2019-16056 | High | 2019-09-06 | Outside Waratek scope | No public exploit | An issue was discovered in Python through 2.7.16, 3.x through 3.5.7, 3.6.x through 3.6.9, and 3.7.x through 3.7.4. The email module wrongly parses email addresses that contain multiple @ characters. An application that uses the email module and implements some kind of checks on the From/To headers of a message could be tricked into accepting an email address that should be denied. An attack may be the same as in CVE-2019-11340; however, this CVE applies to Python more generally. |
| CVE-2019-10160 | Critical | 2019-06-07 | Outside Waratek scope | No public exploit | A security regression of CVE-2019-9636 was discovered in python since commit d537ab0ff9767ef024f26246899728f0116b1ec3 affecting versions 2.7, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7 and from v3.8.0a4 through v3.8.0b1, which still allows an attacker to exploit CVE-2019-9636 by abusing the user and password parts of a URL. When an application parses user-supplied URLs to store cookies, authentication credentials, or other kind of information, it is possible for an attacker to provide specially crafted URLs to make the application locate host-related information (e.g. cookies, authentication data) and send them to a different host than where it should, unlike if the URLs had been correctly parsed. The result of an attack may vary based on the application. |
| CVE-2016-2183 | High | 2016-09-01 | Outside Waratek scope | Proof of concept only | The DES and Triple DES ciphers, as used in the TLS, SSH, and IPSec protocols and other protocols and products, have a birthday bound of approximately four billion blocks, which makes it easier for remote attackers to obtain cleartext data via a birthday attack against a long-duration encrypted session, as demonstrated by an HTTPS session using Triple DES in CBC mode, aka a "Sweet32" attack. |
| CVE-2014-0224 | High | 2014-06-05 | Outside Waratek scope | Exploited | OpenSSL before 0.9.8za, 1.0.0 before 1.0.0m, and 1.0.1 before 1.0.1h does not properly restrict processing of ChangeCipherSpec messages, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to trigger use of a zero-length master key in certain OpenSSL-to-OpenSSL communications, and consequently hijack sessions or obtain sensitive information, via a crafted TLS handshake, aka the "CCS Injection" vulnerability. |