Overview 3 matches · 0 in Waratek scope · 0 protected · 0 exploited · 0 CISA KEV · 0 public PoC · 0 EPSS ≥ 0.5
3matches
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
3
100.0%
Withdrawn CVE
0
0.0%
blocked by ARMR today
0
0.0%
partly blocked
0
0.0%
not blocked
3
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
1
33.3%
Forecast only
0
0.0%
No public exploit
2
66.7%
split by
peak 2 / month
Jan 24Feb 24Mar 24Apr 24May 24Jun 24Jul 24Aug 24
| CVE | Severity | Published▾ | Status | Exploitation | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2024-45244 | Medium | 2024-08-25 | Not applicable | No public exploit | Hyperledger Fabric through 3.0.0 and 2.5.x through 2.5.9 do not verify that a request has a timestamp within the expected time window. |
| CVE-2024-22192 | Medium | 2024-01-16 | Not applicable | No public exploit | Ursa is a cryptographic library for use with blockchains. The revocation scheme that is part of the Ursa CL-Signatures implementations has a flaw that could impact the privacy guarantees defined by the AnonCreds verifiable credential model. Notably, a malicious verifier may be able to generate a unique identifier for a holder providing a verifiable presentation that includes a Non-Revocation proof. The impact of the flaw is that a malicious verifier may be able to determine a unique identifier for a holder presenting a Non-Revocation proof. Ursa has moved to end-of-life status and no fix is expected. |
| CVE-2022-31021 | Medium | 2024-01-16 | Not applicable | Proof of concept only | Ursa is a cryptographic library for use with blockchains. A weakness in the Hyperledger AnonCreds specification that is not mitigated in the Ursa and AnonCreds implementations is that the Issuer does not publish a key correctness proof demonstrating that a generated private key is sufficient to meet the unlinkability guarantees of AnonCreds. The Ursa and AnonCreds CL-Signatures implementations always generate a sufficient private key. A malicious issuer could in theory create a custom CL Signature implementation (derived from the Ursa or AnonCreds CL-Signatures implementations) that uses weakened private keys such that presentations from holders could be shared by verifiers to the issuer who could determine the holder to which the credential was issued. This vulnerability could impact holders of AnonCreds credentials implemented using the CL-signature scheme in the Ursa and AnonCreds implementations of CL Signatures. The ursa project has has moved to end-of-life status and no fix is expected. |