Vulnerabilities

6SHR system from Gether Technology does not properly validate uploaded file types, allowing remote attackers with regular privileges to upload web shell scripts and use them to execute arbitrary system commands on the server.

An issue was discovered in libexpat before 2.6.3. dtdCopy in xmlparse.c can have an integer overflow for nDefaultAtts on 32-bit platforms (where UINT_MAX equals SIZE_MAX).

An issue was discovered in libexpat before 2.6.3. nextScaffoldPart in xmlparse.c can have an integer overflow for m_groupSize on 32-bit platforms (where UINT_MAX equals SIZE_MAX).

An issue was discovered in libexpat before 2.6.3. xmlparse.c does not reject a negative length for XML_ParseBuffer.

One Identity Safeguard for Privileged Passwords before 7.5.2 allows unauthorized access because of an issue related to cookies. This only affects virtual appliance installations (VMware or HyperV). The fixed versions are 7.0.5.1 LTS, 7.4.2, and 7.5.2.

** UNSUPPORTED WHEN ASSIGNED ** A command injection vulnerability in the functions formSysCmd(), formUpgradeCert(), and formDelcert() in the Zyxel NWA1100-N firmware version 1.00(AACE.1)C0 could allow an unauthenticated attacker to execute some OS commands to access system files on an affected device.

Fault Injection vulnerability in wc_ed25519_sign_msg function in wolfssl/wolfcrypt/src/ed25519.c in WolfSSL wolfssl5.6.6 on Linux/Windows allows remote attacker co-resides in the same system with a victim process to disclose information and escalate privileges via Rowhammer fault injection to the ed25519_key structure.

The side-channel protected T-Table implementation in wolfSSL up to version 5.6.5 protects against a side-channel attacker with cache-line resolution. In a controlled environment such as Intel SGX, an attacker can gain a per instruction sub-cache-line resolution allowing them to break the cache-line-level protection. For details on the attack refer to: https://doi.org/10.46586/tches.v2024.i1.457-500

Fault Injection vulnerability in RsaPrivateDecryption function in wolfssl/wolfcrypt/src/rsa.c in WolfSSL wolfssl5.6.6 on Linux/Windows allows remote attacker co-resides in the same system with a victim process to disclose information and escalate privileges via Rowhammer fault injection to the RsaKey structure.

An application can be configured to block boot attempts after consecutive tamper resets are detected, which may not occur as expected.<br /> <br /> This is possible because the TAMPERRSTCAUSE register may not be properly updated when a level 4 tamper event (a tamper reset) occurs. This impacts Series 2 HSE-SVH devices, including xG23B, xG24B, xG25B, and xG28B, but does not impact xG21B. To mitigate this issue, upgrade to SE Firmware version 2.2.6 or later.

RestSharp is a Simple REST and HTTP API Client for .NET. The second argument to `RestRequest.AddHeader` (the header value) is vulnerable to CRLF injection. The same applies to `RestRequest.AddOrUpdateHeader` and `RestClient.AddDefaultHeader`. The way HTTP headers are added to a request is via the `HttpHeaders.TryAddWithoutValidation` method which does not check for CRLF characters in the header value. This means that any headers from a `RestSharp.RequestHeaders` object are added to the request in such a way that they are vulnerable to CRLF-injection. In general, CRLF-injection into a HTTP header (when using HTTP/1.1) means that one can inject additional HTTP headers or smuggle whole HTTP requests. If an application using the RestSharp library passes a user-controllable value through to a header, then that application becomes vulnerable to CRLF-injection. This is not necessarily a security issue for a command line application like the one above, but if such code were present in a web application then it becomes vulnerable to request splitting (as shown in the PoC) and thus Server Side Request Forgery. Strictly speaking this is a potential vulnerability in applications using RestSharp, not in RestSharp itself, but I would argue that at the very least there needs to be a warning about this behaviour in the RestSharp documentation. RestSharp has addressed this issue in version 112.0.0. All users are advised to upgrade. There are no known workarounds for this vulnerability.

In WhatsUp Gold versions released before 2024.0.0, if the application is configured with only a single user, a SQL Injection vulnerability allows an unauthenticated attacker to retrieve the users encrypted password.