WaratekVRT Sign in

Java SE CPU Oct 2010

Released October 2010 · Oracle's advisory ↗ · ← Critical Patch Update, October 2010 · Critical Patch Update, January 2011 →

29 CVEs in this release, one square each

No exploit publishedNo exploit publishedNo exploit publishedNo exploit publishedNo exploit publishedOutside Waratek scope, exploitedOutside Waratek scopeOutside Waratek scopeOutside Waratek scopeOutside Waratek scopeOutside Waratek scopeOutside Waratek scopeOutside Waratek scopeOutside Waratek scopeOutside Waratek scopeOutside Waratek scopeOutside Waratek scopeOutside Waratek scopeOutside Waratek scopeOutside Waratek scopeOutside Waratek scopeOutside Waratek scopeOutside Waratek scopeOutside Waratek scopeOutside Waratek scopeOutside Waratek scopeOutside Waratek scopeOutside Waratek scopeNot applicable, exploited
Share this chart Java SE CPU Oct 2010, one square per CVE: 5 Java CVEs, 2 exploited, 24 other CVEs in this release.

Download the image

By status

5No exploit published23Outside Waratek scope1Not applicable 2Exploited, marked by the ring

No exploit published. For 5 of them, Oracle's security advisory is the source of public detail.

Reset
More filters (1)
Columns
Including CVEs outside Waratek scope✕EPSS ≥ 0.5✕
Overview 3 matches · 0 in Waratek scope · 0 protected · 2 exploited · 0 CISA KEV
3matches 0in Waratek scope0.0% 0protected0.0% 2exploited66.7% 0CISA KEV0.0%
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0 0.0% Mitigation candidate 0 0.0% No exploit published 0 0.0% Outside Waratek scope 2 66.7% Not applicable 1 33.3% Withdrawn CVE 0 0.0%
Critical 1 33.3% High 2 66.7% Medium 0 0.0% Low 0 0.0% None 0 0.0% Unknown 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 2 66.7% Working exploit published 1 33.3% Proof of concept only 0 0.0% Forecast only 0 0.0% No public exploit 0 0.0%
split by peak 2 / month
Not applicable: 1Outside Waratek scope: 2 High: 2Critical: 1 not blocked: 3 Working exploit published: 1Exploited: 2
Nov 091 Not applicable1 Critical1 not blocked1 Exploited1 Dec 090 Jan 100 Feb 100 Mar 100 Apr 100 May 100 Jun 100 Jul 100 Aug 100 Sep 100 Oct 102 Outside Waratek scope2 High2 not blocked2 Exploited1 Working exploit published1
Nov 09Dec 09Jan 10Feb 10Mar 10Apr 10May 10Jun 10Jul 10Aug 10Sep 10Oct 10
3 matches Sign in to download these CVEs as CSV or JSON, or to follow them in a feed.
CVE Severity Published▾ Status Exploitation Description
CVE-2010-3563 High 2010-10-19 Outside Waratek scope Working exploit published Unspecified vulnerability in the Deployment component in Oracle Java SE and Java for Business 6 Update 21 allows remote attackers to affect confidentiality, integrity, and availability via unknown vectors. NOTE: the previous information was obtained from the October 2010 CPU. Oracle has not commented on claims from a reliable researcher that this is related to "how Web Start retrieves security policies," BasicServiceImpl, and forged policies that bypass sandbox restrictions.
CVE-2010-3552 High 2010-10-19 Outside Waratek scope Exploited Unspecified vulnerability in the New Java Plug-in component in Oracle Java SE and Java for Business 6 Update 21 allows remote attackers to affect confidentiality, integrity, and availability via unknown vectors.
CVE-2009-3555 Critical 2009-11-09 Not applicable Exploited The TLS protocol, and the SSL protocol 3.0 and possibly earlier, as used in Microsoft Internet Information Services (IIS) 7.0, mod_ssl in the Apache HTTP Server 2.2.14 and earlier, OpenSSL before 0.9.8l, GnuTLS 2.8.5 and earlier, Mozilla Network Security Services (NSS) 3.12.4 and earlier, multiple Cisco products, and other products, does not properly associate renegotiation handshakes with an existing connection, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to insert data into HTTPS sessions, and possibly other types of sessions protected by TLS or SSL, by sending an unauthenticated request that is processed retroactively by a server in a post-renegotiation context, related to a "plaintext injection" attack, aka the "Project Mogul" issue.