Total
210374 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v2 | CVSS v3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2018-12140 | 2023-02-27 | N/A | N/A | ||
| ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues. Notes: none. | |||||
| CVE-2018-12139 | 2023-02-27 | N/A | N/A | ||
| ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues. Notes: none. | |||||
| CVE-2018-12138 | 2023-02-27 | N/A | N/A | ||
| ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues. Notes: none. | |||||
| CVE-2018-12137 | 2023-02-27 | N/A | N/A | ||
| ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues. Notes: none. | |||||
| CVE-2018-12136 | 2023-02-27 | N/A | N/A | ||
| ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues. Notes: none. | |||||
| CVE-2018-12135 | 2023-02-27 | N/A | N/A | ||
| ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues. Notes: none. | |||||
| CVE-2018-12134 | 2023-02-27 | N/A | N/A | ||
| ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues. Notes: none. | |||||
| CVE-2018-12133 | 2023-02-27 | N/A | N/A | ||
| ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues. Notes: none. | |||||
| CVE-2018-12132 | 2023-02-27 | N/A | N/A | ||
| ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues. Notes: none. | |||||
| CVE-2018-12129 | 2023-02-27 | N/A | N/A | ||
| ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues. Notes: none. | |||||
| CVE-2018-12128 | 2023-02-27 | N/A | N/A | ||
| ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues. Notes: none. | |||||
| CVE-2018-12125 | 2023-02-27 | N/A | N/A | ||
| ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues. Notes: none. | |||||
| CVE-2022-42472 | 1 Fortinet | 2 Fortios, Fortiproxy | 2023-02-27 | N/A | 5.4 MEDIUM |
| A improper neutralization of crlf sequences in http headers ('http response splitting') in Fortinet FortiOS versions 7.2.0 through 7.2.2, 7.0.0 through 7.0.8, 6.4.0 through 6.4.11, 6.2.0 through 6.2.12, 6.0.0 through 6.0.16, FortiProxy 7.2.0 through 7.2.1, 7.0.0 through 7.0.7, 2.0.0 through 2.0.10, 1.2.0 through 1.2.13, 1.1.0 through 1.1.6 may allow an authenticated and remote attacker to perform an HTTP request splitting attack which gives attackers control of the remaining headers and body of the response. | |||||
| CVE-2020-14400 | 4 Canonical, Debian, Libvncserver Project and 1 more | 4 Ubuntu Linux, Debian Linux, Libvncserver and 1 more | 2023-02-27 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| ** DISPUTED ** An issue was discovered in LibVNCServer before 0.9.13. Byte-aligned data is accessed through uint16_t pointers in libvncserver/translate.c. NOTE: Third parties do not consider this to be a vulnerability as there is no known path of exploitation or cross of a trust boundary. | |||||
| CVE-2020-14399 | 4 Canonical, Debian, Libvncserver Project and 1 more | 4 Ubuntu Linux, Debian Linux, Libvncserver and 1 more | 2023-02-27 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| ** DISPUTED ** An issue was discovered in LibVNCServer before 0.9.13. Byte-aligned data is accessed through uint32_t pointers in libvncclient/rfbproto.c. NOTE: there is reportedly "no trust boundary crossed." | |||||
| CVE-2020-14954 | 6 Canonical, Debian, Fedoraproject and 3 more | 6 Ubuntu Linux, Debian Linux, Fedora and 3 more | 2023-02-27 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 5.9 MEDIUM |
| Mutt before 1.14.4 and NeoMutt before 2020-06-19 have a STARTTLS buffering issue that affects IMAP, SMTP, and POP3. When a server sends a "begin TLS" response, the client reads additional data (e.g., from a man-in-the-middle attacker) and evaluates it in a TLS context, aka "response injection." | |||||
| CVE-2020-10177 | 4 Canonical, Debian, Fedoraproject and 1 more | 4 Ubuntu Linux, Debian Linux, Fedora and 1 more | 2023-02-27 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 5.5 MEDIUM |
| Pillow before 7.1.0 has multiple out-of-bounds reads in libImaging/FliDecode.c. | |||||
| CVE-2020-10378 | 3 Canonical, Fedoraproject, Python | 3 Ubuntu Linux, Fedora, Pillow | 2023-02-27 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 5.5 MEDIUM |
| In libImaging/PcxDecode.c in Pillow before 7.1.0, an out-of-bounds read can occur when reading PCX files where state->shuffle is instructed to read beyond state->buffer. | |||||
| CVE-2020-10994 | 3 Canonical, Fedoraproject, Python | 3 Ubuntu Linux, Fedora, Pillow | 2023-02-27 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 5.5 MEDIUM |
| In libImaging/Jpeg2KDecode.c in Pillow before 7.1.0, there are multiple out-of-bounds reads via a crafted JP2 file. | |||||
| CVE-2020-10379 | 3 Canonical, Fedoraproject, Python | 3 Ubuntu Linux, Fedora, Pillow | 2023-02-27 | 6.8 MEDIUM | 7.8 HIGH |
| In Pillow before 7.1.0, there are two Buffer Overflows in libImaging/TiffDecode.c. | |||||