| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in ecrire/exec/valider_xml.php in SPIP 3.1.2 and earlier allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of administrators for requests that execute the XML validator on a local file via a crafted valider_xml request. NOTE: this issue can be combined with CVE-2016-7998 to execute arbitrary PHP code. |
| Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Intel Security VirusScan Enterprise Linux (VSEL) 2.0.3 (and earlier) allows authenticated remote attackers to execute unauthorized commands via a crafted user input. |
| A CSRF vulnerability in Brocade Virtual Traffic Manager versions released prior to and including 11.0 could allow an attacker to trick a logged-in user into making administrative changes on the traffic manager cluster. |
| A cross-site request forgery vulnerability in Lenovo Service Bridge before version 4 could be exploited by an attacker with access to the DHCP server used by the system where LSB is installed. |
| An issue was discovered in Moxa ioLogik E1210, firmware Version V2.4 and prior, ioLogik E1211, firmware Version V2.3 and prior, ioLogik E1212, firmware Version V2.4 and prior, ioLogik E1213, firmware Version V2.5 and prior, ioLogik E1214, firmware Version V2.4 and prior, ioLogik E1240, firmware Version V2.3 and prior, ioLogik E1241, firmware Version V2.4 and prior, ioLogik E1242, firmware Version V2.4 and prior, ioLogik E1260, firmware Version V2.4 and prior, ioLogik E1262, firmware Version V2.4 and prior, ioLogik E2210, firmware versions prior to V3.13, ioLogik E2212, firmware versions prior to V3.14, ioLogik E2214, firmware versions prior to V3.12, ioLogik E2240, firmware versions prior to V3.12, ioLogik E2242, firmware versions prior to V3.12, ioLogik E2260, firmware versions prior to V3.13, and ioLogik E2262, firmware versions prior to V3.12. The web application may not sufficiently verify whether a request was provided by a valid user (CROSS-SITE REQUEST FORGERY). |
| An issue was discovered in Lynxspring JENEsys BAS Bridge versions 1.1.8 and older. The application does not sufficiently verify if a request was intentionally provided by the user who submitted the request (CROSS-SITE REQUEST FORGERY). |
| IBM InfoSphere Master Data Management Server 10.1, 11.0, 11.3, 11.4, 11.5, and 11.6 is vulnerable to cross-site request forgery which could allow an attacker to execute malicious and unauthorized actions transmitted from a user that the website trusts. IBM X-Force ID: 119727. |
| IBM InfoSphere Master Data Management Server 11.0, 11.3, 11.4, 11.5, and 11.6 is vulnerable to cross-site request forgery which could allow an attacker to execute malicious and unauthorized actions transmitted from a user that the website trusts. IBM X-Force ID: 119729. |
| IBM QRadar Incident Forensics 7.2 is vulnerable to cross-site request forgery which could allow an attacker to execute malicious and unauthorized actions transmitted from a user that the website trusts. IBM Reference #: 1999549. |
| IBM Jazz for Service Management 1.1.2.1 and 1.1.3 is vulnerable to cross-site request forgery which could allow an attacker to execute malicious and unauthorized actions transmitted from a user that the website trusts. IBM Reference #: 1998714. |
| IBM Sterling Order Management 9.2 through 9.5 is vulnerable to cross-site request forgery which could allow an attacker to execute malicious and unauthorized actions transmitted from a user that the website trusts. IBM X-Force ID: 121314. |
| Chyrp Lite version 2016.04 is vulnerable to a CSRF in the user settings function allowing attackers to hijack the authentication of logged in users to modify account information, including their password. |
| CSRF in Bitly oauth2_proxy 2.1 during authentication flow |
| Subversion Plugin connects to a user-specified Subversion repository as part of form validation (e.g. to retrieve a list of tags). This functionality improperly checked permissions, allowing any user with Item/Build permission (but not Item/Configure) to connect to any web server or Subversion server and send credentials with a known ID, thereby possibly capturing them. Additionally, this functionality did not require POST requests be used, thereby allowing the above to be performed without direct access to Jenkins via Cross-Site Request Forgery attacks. |
| Role-based Authorization Strategy Plugin was not requiring requests to its API be sent via POST, thereby opening itself to Cross-Site Request Forgery attacks. This allowed attackers to add administrator role to any user, or to remove the authorization configuration, preventing legitimate access to Jenkins. |
| GitHub Branch Source Plugin connects to a user-specified GitHub API URL (e.g. GitHub Enterprise) as part of form validation and completion (e.g. to verify Scan Credentials are correct). This functionality improperly checked permissions, allowing any user with Overall/Read access to Jenkins to connect to any web server and send credentials with a known ID, thereby possibly capturing them. Additionally, this functionality did not require POST requests be used, thereby allowing the above to be performed without direct access to Jenkins via Cross-Site Request Forgery. |
| Git Plugin connects to a user-specified Git repository as part of form validation. An attacker with no direct access to Jenkins but able to guess at a username/password credentials ID could trick a developer with job configuration permissions into following a link with a maliciously crafted Jenkins URL which would result in the Jenkins Git client sending the username and password to an attacker-controlled server. |
| Poll SCM Plugin was not requiring requests to its API be sent via POST, thereby opening itself to Cross-Site Request Forgery attacks. This allowed attackers to initiate polling of projects with a known name. While Jenkins in general does not consider polling to be a protection-worthy action as it's similar to cache invalidation, the plugin specifically adds a permission to be able to use this functionality, and this issue undermines that permission. |
| Mahara 1.9 before 1.9.8 and 1.10 before 1.10.6 and 15.04 before 15.04.3 are vulnerable to perform a cross-site request forgery (CSRF) attack on the uploader contained in Mahara's filebrowser widget. This could allow an attacker to trick a Mahara user into unknowingly uploading malicious files into their Mahara account. |
| CSRF in YouTube (WordPress plugin) could allow unauthenticated attacker to change any setting within the plugin |
