Oracle Critical Patch Update April 2023
Released April 2023 · Oracle's advisory ↗ · ← Critical Patch Update, January 2023 · Critical Patch Update, July 2023 →
328 CVEs in this release, one square each
By status
47Protected by Waratek9Mitigation candidate119No exploit published35Outside Waratek scope118Not applicable
12Exploited, marked by the ring
No exploit published. For 56 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 7 matches · 0 in Waratek scope · 0 protected · 2 exploited · 1 CISA KEV · 6 EPSS ≥ 0.5
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
7
100.0%
Withdrawn CVE
0
0.0%
blocked by ARMR today
0
0.0%
partly blocked
0
0.0%
not blocked
7
100.0%
not established
0
0.0%
unrecorded
0
0.0%
Exploited
2
28.6%
Working exploit published
1
14.3%
Proof of concept only
4
57.1%
Forecast only
0
0.0%
No public exploit
0
0.0%
split by
peak 2 / quarter
Q4 191
Not applicable1
Critical1
not blocked1
Exploited1
Q1 200
Q2 200
Q3 200
Q4 200
Q1 210
Q2 211
Not applicable1
High1
not blocked1
Working exploit published1
Q3 210
Q4 210
Q1 220
Q2 220
Q3 221
Not applicable1
High1
not blocked1
Proof of concept only1
Q4 222
Not applicable2
High2
not blocked2
Proof of concept only2
Q1 232
Not applicable2
Critical1
Medium1
not blocked2
Exploited1
Proof of concept only1
Q1 20Q3 20Q1 21Q3 21Q1 22Q3 22Q1 23
| CVE | Severity | Published▾ | Status | Exploitation | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2023-25690 | Critical | 2023-03-07 | Not applicable | Exploited | Some mod_proxy configurations on Apache HTTP Server versions 2.4.0 through 2.4.55 allow a HTTP Request Smuggling attack. Configurations are affected when mod_proxy is enabled along with some form of RewriteRule or ProxyPassMatch in which a non-specific pattern matches some portion of the user-supplied request-target (URL) data and is then re-inserted into the proxied request-target using variable substitution. For example, something like: RewriteEngine on RewriteRule "^/here/(.*)" "http://example.com:8080/elsewhere?$1"; [P] ProxyPassReverse /here/ http://example.com:8080/ Request splitting/smuggling could result in bypass of access controls in the proxy server, proxying unintended URLs to existing origin servers, and cache poisoning. Users are recommended to update to at least version 2.4.56 of Apache HTTP Server. |
| CVE-2023-25136 | Medium | 2023-02-03 | Not applicable | Proof of concept only | OpenSSH server (sshd) 9.1 introduced a double-free vulnerability during options.kex_algorithms handling. This is fixed in OpenSSH 9.2. The double free can be leveraged, by an unauthenticated remote attacker in the default configuration, to jump to any location in the sshd address space. One third-party report states "remote code execution is theoretically possible." |
| CVE-2022-3786 | High | 2022-11-01 | Not applicable | Proof of concept only | A buffer overrun can be triggered in X.509 certificate verification, specifically in name constraint checking. Note that this occurs after certificate chain signature verification and requires either a CA to have signed a malicious certificate or for an application to continue certificate verification despite failure to construct a path to a trusted issuer. An attacker can craft a malicious email address in a certificate to overflow an arbitrary number of bytes containing the `.' character (decimal 46) on the stack. This buffer overflow could result in a crash (causing a denial of service). In a TLS client, this can be triggered by connecting to a malicious server. In a TLS server, this can be triggered if the server requests client authentication and a malicious client connects. |
| CVE-2022-3602 | High | 2022-11-01 | Not applicable | Proof of concept only | A buffer overrun can be triggered in X.509 certificate verification, specifically in name constraint checking. Note that this occurs after certificate chain signature verification and requires either a CA to have signed the malicious certificate or for the application to continue certificate verification despite failure to construct a path to a trusted issuer. An attacker can craft a malicious email address to overflow four attacker-controlled bytes on the stack. This buffer overflow could result in a crash (causing a denial of service) or potentially remote code execution. Many platforms implement stack overflow protections which would mitigate against the risk of remote code execution. The risk may be further mitigated based on stack layout for any given platform/compiler. Pre-announcements of CVE-2022-3602 described this issue as CRITICAL. Further analysis based on some of the mitigating factors described above have led this to be downgraded to HIGH. Users are still encouraged to upgrade to a new version as soon as possible. In a TLS client, this can be triggered by connecting to a malicious server. In a TLS server, this can be triggered if the server requests client authentication and a malicious client connects. Fixed in OpenSSL 3.0.7 (Affected 3.0.0,3.0.1,3.0.2,3.0.3,3.0.4,3.0.5,3.0.6). |
| CVE-2022-35737 | High | 2022-08-03 | Not applicable | Proof of concept only | SQLite 1.0.12 through 3.39.x before 3.39.2 sometimes allows an array-bounds overflow if billions of bytes are used in a string argument to a C API. |
| CVE-2021-23017 | High | 2021-06-01 | Not applicable | Working exploit published | A security issue in nginx resolver was identified, which might allow an attacker who is able to forge UDP packets from the DNS server to cause 1-byte memory overwrite, resulting in worker process crash or potential other impact. |
| CVE-2019-18935 | Critical | 2019-12-11 | Not applicable | Exploited | Progress Telerik UI for ASP.NET AJAX through 2019.3.1023 contains a .NET deserialization vulnerability in the RadAsyncUpload function. This is exploitable when the encryption keys are known due to the presence of CVE-2017-11317 or CVE-2017-11357, or other means. Exploitation can result in remote code execution. (As of 2020.1.114, a default setting prevents the exploit. In 2019.3.1023, but not earlier versions, a non-default setting can prevent exploitation.) |