Vulnerabilities

Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to resource loops, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker creates multiple request streams and continually shuffles the priority of the streams in a way that causes substantial churn to the priority tree. This can consume excess CPU.

Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to ping floods, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker sends continual pings to an HTTP/2 peer, causing the peer to build an internal queue of responses. Depending on how efficiently this data is queued, this can consume excess CPU, memory, or both.

Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to window size manipulation and stream prioritization manipulation, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker requests a large amount of data from a specified resource over multiple streams. They manipulate window size and stream priority to force the server to queue the data in 1-byte chunks. Depending on how efficiently this data is queued, this can consume excess CPU, memory, or both.

Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to a settings flood, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker sends a stream of SETTINGS frames to the peer. Since the RFC requires that the peer reply with one acknowledgement per SETTINGS frame, an empty SETTINGS frame is almost equivalent in behavior to a ping. Depending on how efficiently this data is queued, this can consume excess CPU, memory, or both.

Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to a reset flood, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker opens a number of streams and sends an invalid request over each stream that should solicit a stream of RST_STREAM frames from the peer. Depending on how the peer queues the RST_STREAM frames, this can consume excess memory, CPU, or both.

An issue was discovered in 20|20 Storage 2.11.0. A Path Traversal vulnerability in the TwentyTwenty.Storage library in the LocalStorageProvider allows creating and reading files outside of the specified basepath. If the application using this library does not sanitize user-supplied filenames, then this issue may be exploited to read or write arbitrary files. This affects LocalStorageProvider.cs.

The web server component of TIBCO Software Inc.'s TIBCO LogLogic Enterprise Virtual Appliance, and TIBCO LogLogic Log Management Intelligence contains multiple vulnerabilities that theoretically allow persistent and reflected cross-site scripting (XSS) attacks, as well as cross-site request forgery (CSRF) attacks. This issue affects: TIBCO Software Inc. TIBCO LogLogic Enterprise Virtual Appliance version 6.2.1 and prior versions. TIBCO Software Inc. TIBCO LogLogic Log Management Intelligence 6.2.1. TIBCO LogLogic LX825 Appliance 0.0.004, TIBCO LogLogic LX1025 Appliance 0.0.004, TIBCO LogLogic LX4025 Appliance 0.0.004, TIBCO LogLogic MX3025 Appliance 0.0.004, TIBCO LogLogic MX4025 Appliance 0.0.004, TIBCO LogLogic ST1025 Appliance 0.0.004, TIBCO LogLogic ST2025-SAN Appliance 0.0.004, and TIBCO LogLogic ST4025 Appliance 0.0.004 using TIBCO LogLogic Log Management Intelligence versions 6.2.1 and below. TIBCO LogLogic LX1035 Appliance 0.0.005, TIBCO LogLogic LX1025R1 Appliance 0.0.004, TIBCO LogLogic LX1025R2 Appliance 0.0.004, TIBCO LogLogic LX4025R1 Appliance 0.0.004, TIBCO LogLogic LX4025R2 Appliance 0.0.004, TIBCO LogLogic LX4035 Appliance 0.0.005, TIBCO LogLogic ST2025-SANR1 Appliance 0.0.004, TIBCO LogLogic ST2025-SANR2 Appliance 0.0.004, TIBCO LogLogic ST2035-SAN Appliance 0.0.005, TIBCO LogLogic ST4025R1 Appliance 0.0.004, TIBCO LogLogic ST4025R2 Appliance 0.0.004, and TIBCO LogLogic ST4035 Appliance 0.0.005 using TIBCO LogLogic Log Management Intelligence versions 6.2.1 and below.

net/url in Go before 1.11.13 and 1.12.x before 1.12.8 mishandles malformed hosts in URLs, leading to an authorization bypass in some applications. This is related to a Host field with a suffix appearing in neither Hostname() nor Port(), and is related to a non-numeric port number. For example, an attacker can compose a crafted javascript:// URL that results in a hostname of google.com.

eQ-3 Homematic CCU2 and CCU3 with the XML-API through 1.2.0 AddOn installed allow Remote Code Execution by unauthenticated attackers with access to the web interface, because the undocumented addons/xmlapi/exec.cgi script uses CMD_EXEC to execute TCL code from a POST request.

eQ-3 Homematic CCU2 and CCU3 with the CUxD AddOn installed allow Remote Code Execution by unauthenticated attackers with access to the web interface, because this interface can access the CMD_EXEC virtual device type 28.

eQ-3 Homematic CCU2 and CCU3 with the CUxD AddOn before 2.3.0 installed allow administrative operations by unauthenticated attackers with access to the web interface, because features such as File-Browser and Shell Command (as well as "Set root password") are exposed.

UniSign 2.0.4.0 and earlier version contains a stack-based buffer overflow vulnerability which can overwrite the stack with arbitrary data, due to a buffer overflow in a library. That leads remote attacker to execute arbitrary code via crafted https packets.