Overview 8 matches · 0 in Waratek scope · 0 protected · 0 exploited · 0 CISA KEV · 0 public PoC · 0 EPSS ≥ 0.5
8matches
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
0
0.0%
Not applicable
8
100.0%
Withdrawn CVE
0
0.0%
blocked by ARMR today
0
0.0%
partly blocked
0
0.0%
not blocked
8
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
8
100.0%
split by
peak 2 / year
20041
Not applicable1
High1
not blocked1
No public exploit1
20050
20060
20071
Not applicable1
High1
not blocked1
No public exploit1
20080
20090
20100
20110
20121
Not applicable1
High1
not blocked1
No public exploit1
20130
20140
20150
20160
20172
Not applicable2
High2
not blocked2
No public exploit2
20180
20191
Not applicable1
High1
not blocked1
No public exploit1
20200
20211
Not applicable1
High1
not blocked1
No public exploit1
20221
Not applicable1
High1
not blocked1
No public exploit1
2004200620082010201220142016201820202022
| CVE | Severity | Published▾ | Status | Exploitation | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2021-36369 | High | 2022-10-12 | Not applicable | No public exploit | An issue was discovered in Dropbear through 2020.81. Due to a non-RFC-compliant check of the available authentication methods in the client-side SSH code, it is possible for an SSH server to change the login process in its favor. This attack can bypass additional security measures such as FIDO2 tokens or SSH-Askpass. Thus, it allows an attacker to abuse a forwarded agent for logging on to another server unnoticed. |
| CVE-2020-36254 | High | 2021-02-25 | Not applicable | No public exploit | scp.c in Dropbear before 2020.79 mishandles the filename of . or an empty filename, a related issue to CVE-2018-20685. |
| CVE-2017-2659 | High | 2019-03-21 | Not applicable | No public exploit | It was found that dropbear before version 2013.59 with GSSAPI leaks whether given username is valid or invalid. When an invalid username is given, the GSSAPI authentication failure was incorrectly counted towards the maximum allowed number of password attempts. |
| CVE-2017-9078 | High | 2017-05-19 | Not applicable | No public exploit | The server in Dropbear before 2017.75 might allow post-authentication root remote code execution because of a double free in cleanup of TCP listeners when the -a option is enabled. |
| CVE-2016-7408 | High | 2017-03-03 | Not applicable | No public exploit | The dbclient in Dropbear SSH before 2016.74 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted (1) -m or (2) -c argument. |
| CVE-2012-0920 | High | 2012-06-05 | Not applicable | No public exploit | Use-after-free vulnerability in Dropbear SSH Server 0.52 through 2012.54, when command restriction and public key authentication are enabled, allows remote authenticated users to execute arbitrary code and bypass command restrictions via multiple crafted command requests, related to "channels concurrency." |
| CVE-2007-1099 | High | 2007-02-26 | Not applicable | No public exploit | dbclient in Dropbear SSH client before 0.49 does not sufficiently warn the user when it detects a hostkey mismatch, which might allow remote attackers to conduct man-in-the-middle attacks. |
| CVE-2004-2486 | High | 2004-12-31 | Not applicable | No public exploit | The DSS verification code in Dropbear SSH Server before 0.43 frees uninitialized variables, which might allow remote attackers to gain access. |