| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| Uploaded XML documents were not correctly validated in Apache OpenMeetings 3.1.0. |
| Both global and Room chat are vulnerable to XSS attack in Apache OpenMeetings 3.2.0. |
| Apache CXF Fediz ships with an OpenId Connect (OIDC) service which has a Client Registration Service, which is a simple web application that allows clients to be created, deleted, etc. A CSRF (Cross Style Request Forgery) style vulnerability has been found in this web application in Apache CXF Fediz prior to 1.4.0 and 1.3.2, meaning that a malicious web application could create new clients, or reset secrets, etc, after the admin user has logged on to the client registration service and the session is still active. |
| Apache CXF Fediz ships with a number of container-specific plugins to enable WS-Federation for applications. A CSRF (Cross Style Request Forgery) style vulnerability has been found in the Spring 2, Spring 3, Jetty 8 and Jetty 9 plugins in Apache CXF Fediz prior to 1.4.0, 1.3.2 and 1.2.4. |
| Apache Solr uses a PKI based mechanism to secure inter-node communication when security is enabled. It is possible to create a specially crafted node name that does not exist as part of the cluster and point it to a malicious node. This can trick the nodes in cluster to believe that the malicious node is a member of the cluster. So, if Solr users have enabled BasicAuth authentication mechanism using the BasicAuthPlugin or if the user has implemented a custom Authentication plugin, which does not implement either "HttpClientInterceptorPlugin" or "HttpClientBuilderPlugin", his/her servers are vulnerable to this attack. Users who only use SSL without basic authentication or those who use Kerberos are not affected. |
| A maliciously constructed HTTP/2 request could cause mod_http2 in Apache HTTP Server 2.4.24, 2.4.25 to dereference a NULL pointer and crash the server process. |
| Apache OpenMeetings 1.0.0 updates user password in insecure manner. |
| Two errors in the "asn1_find_node()" function (lib/parser_aux.c) within GnuTLS libtasn1 version 4.10 can be exploited to cause a stacked-based buffer overflow by tricking a user into processing a specially crafted assignments file via the e.g. asn1Coding utility. |
| In Apache Fineract 0.4.0-incubating, 0.5.0-incubating, and 0.6.0-incubating, an authenticated user with client/loan/center/staff/group read permissions is able to inject malicious SQL into SELECT queries. The 'sqlSearch' parameter on a number of endpoints is not sanitized and appended directly to the query. |
| In Apache Batik before 1.9, files lying on the filesystem of the server which uses batik can be revealed to arbitrary users who send maliciously formed SVG files. The file types that can be shown depend on the user context in which the exploitable application is running. If the user is root a full compromise of the server - including confidential or sensitive files - would be possible. XXE can also be used to attack the availability of the server via denial of service as the references within a xml document can trivially trigger an amplification attack. |
| In Apache FOP before 2.2, files lying on the filesystem of the server which uses FOP can be revealed to arbitrary users who send maliciously formed SVG files. The file types that can be shown depend on the user context in which the exploitable application is running. If the user is root a full compromise of the server - including confidential or sensitive files - would be possible. XXE can also be used to attack the availability of the server via denial of service as the references within a xml document can trivially trigger an amplification attack. |
| Apache Traffic Server before 6.2.1 generates a coredump when there is a mismatch between content length and chunked encoding. |
| Several REST service endpoints of Apache Archiva are not protected against Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF) attacks. A malicious site opened in the same browser as the archiva site, may send an HTML response that performs arbitrary actions on archiva services, with the same rights as the active archiva session (e.g. administrator rights). |
| Apache CXF's STSClient before 3.1.11 and 3.0.13 uses a flawed way of caching tokens that are associated with delegation tokens, which means that an attacker could craft a token which would return an identifer corresponding to a cached token for another user. |
| In Ambari 2.2.2 through 2.4.2 and Ambari 2.5.0, sensitive data may be stored on disk in temporary files on the Ambari Server host. The temporary files are readable by any user authenticated on the host. |
| In Ambari 2.4.x (before 2.4.3) and Ambari 2.5.0, an authorized user of the Ambari Hive View may be able to gain unauthorized read access to files on the host where the Ambari server executes. |
| JAX-RS XML Security streaming clients in Apache CXF before 3.1.11 and 3.0.13 do not validate that the service response was signed or encrypted, which allows remote attackers to spoof servers. |
| During a routine security analysis, it was found that one of the ports in Apache Impala (incubating) 2.7.0 to 2.8.0 sent data in plaintext even when the cluster was configured to use TLS. The port in question was used by the StatestoreSubscriber class which did not use the appropriate secure Thrift transport when TLS was turned on. It was therefore possible for an adversary, with access to the network, to eavesdrop on the packets going to and coming from that port and view the data in plaintext. |
| In Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M18 and 8.5.0 to 8.5.12, the handling of an HTTP/2 GOAWAY frame for a connection did not close streams associated with that connection that were currently waiting for a WINDOW_UPDATE before allowing the application to write more data. These waiting streams each consumed a thread. A malicious client could therefore construct a series of HTTP/2 requests that would consume all available processing threads. |
| In Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M18 and 8.5.0 to 8.5.12, the refactoring of the HTTP connectors introduced a regression in the send file processing. If the send file processing completed quickly, it was possible for the Processor to be added to the processor cache twice. This could result in the same Processor being used for multiple requests which in turn could lead to unexpected errors and/or response mix-up. |
