Oracle Critical Patch Update April 2018
Released April 2018 · Oracle's advisory ↗ · ← Critical Patch Update, January 2018 · Critical Patch Update, July 2018 →
165 CVEs in this release, one square each
By status
20Protected by Waratek2Mitigation candidate54No exploit published30Outside Waratek scope59Not applicable
6Exploited, marked by the ring
No exploit published. For 52 of them, Oracle's security advisory is the source of public detail.
Protected by Waratek. Waratek RASP can block exploitation of these on systems that have not applied the patch yet.
Overview 2 matches · 1 protected · 0 exploited · 0 CISA KEV · 1 public PoC · 1 EPSS ≥ 0.5
Protected by Waratek
1
50.0%
Rule in development
0
0.0%
Mitigation candidate
0
0.0%
No exploit published
1
50.0%
blocked by ARMR today
1
50.0%
partly blocked
0
0.0%
not blocked
1
50.0%
not established
0
0.0%
unrecorded
0
0.0%
Exploited
0
0.0%
Working exploit published
1
50.0%
Proof of concept only
0
0.0%
Forecast only
0
0.0%
No public exploit
1
50.0%
| CVE | Severity | Published▾ | Status | Exploitation | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2016-5007 | High | 2017-05-25 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Both Spring Security 3.2.x, 4.0.x, 4.1.0 and the Spring Framework 3.2.x, 4.0.x, 4.1.x, 4.2.x rely on URL pattern mappings for authorization and for mapping requests to controllers respectively. Differences in the strictness of the pattern matching mechanisms, for example with regards to space trimming in path segments, can lead Spring Security to not recognize certain paths as not protected that are in fact mapped to Spring MVC controllers that should be protected. The problem is compounded by the fact that the Spring Framework provides richer features with regards to pattern matching as well as by the fact that pattern matching in each Spring Security and the Spring Framework can easily be customized creating additional differences. |
| CVE-2017-5645 | Critical | 2017-04-17 | Protected by Waratek | Working exploit published | In Apache Log4j 2.x before 2.8.2, when using the TCP socket server or UDP socket server to receive serialized log events from another application, a specially crafted binary payload can be sent that, when deserialized, can execute arbitrary code. |