Filtered by vendor Apache
Subscriptions
Total
2631 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2017-12633 | 2 Apache, Redhat | 3 Camel, Jboss Amq, Jboss Fuse | 2025-04-20 | N/A |
| The camel-hessian component in Apache Camel 2.x before 2.19.4 and 2.20.x before 2.20.1 is vulnerable to Java object de-serialisation vulnerability. De-serializing untrusted data can lead to security flaws. | ||||
| CVE-2016-8741 | 1 Apache | 1 Qpid Broker-j | 2025-04-20 | 7.5 High |
| The Apache Qpid Broker for Java can be configured to use different so called AuthenticationProviders to handle user authentication. Among the choices are the SCRAM-SHA-1 and SCRAM-SHA-256 AuthenticationProvider types. It was discovered that these AuthenticationProviders in Apache Qpid Broker for Java 6.0.x before 6.0.6 and 6.1.x before 6.1.1 prematurely terminate the SCRAM SASL negotiation if the provided user name does not exist thus allowing remote attacker to determine the existence of user accounts. The Vulnerability does not apply to AuthenticationProviders other than SCRAM-SHA-1 and SCRAM-SHA-256. | ||||
| CVE-2016-6797 | 6 Apache, Canonical, Debian and 3 more | 15 Tomcat, Ubuntu Linux, Debian Linux and 12 more | 2025-04-20 | 7.5 High |
| The ResourceLinkFactory implementation in Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M9, 8.5.0 to 8.5.4, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.36, 7.0.0 to 7.0.70 and 6.0.0 to 6.0.45 did not limit web application access to global JNDI resources to those resources explicitly linked to the web application. Therefore, it was possible for a web application to access any global JNDI resource whether an explicit ResourceLink had been configured or not. | ||||
| CVE-2017-3150 | 1 Apache | 1 Atlas | 2025-04-20 | N/A |
| Apache Atlas versions 0.6.0-incubating and 0.7.0-incubating use cookies that could be accessible to client-side script. | ||||
| CVE-2016-6796 | 6 Apache, Canonical, Debian and 3 more | 16 Tomcat, Ubuntu Linux, Debian Linux and 13 more | 2025-04-20 | 7.5 High |
| A malicious web application running on Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M9, 8.5.0 to 8.5.4, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.36, 7.0.0 to 7.0.70 and 6.0.0 to 6.0.45 was able to bypass a configured SecurityManager via manipulation of the configuration parameters for the JSP Servlet. | ||||
| CVE-2016-6793 | 1 Apache | 1 Wicket | 2025-04-20 | N/A |
| The DiskFileItem class in Apache Wicket 6.x before 6.25.0 and 1.5.x before 1.5.17 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (infinite loop) and write to, move, and delete files with the permissions of DiskFileItem, and if running on a Java VM before 1.3.1, execute arbitrary code via a crafted serialized Java object. | ||||
| CVE-2015-0249 | 1 Apache | 1 Roller | 2025-04-20 | N/A |
| The weblog page template in Apache Roller 5.1 through 5.1.1 allows remote authenticated users with admin privileges for a weblog to execute arbitrary Java code via crafted Velocity Text Language (aka VTL). | ||||
| CVE-2015-0226 | 2 Apache, Redhat | 7 Wss4j, Jboss Amq, Jboss Data Grid and 4 more | 2025-04-20 | N/A |
| Apache WSS4J before 1.6.17 and 2.0.x before 2.0.2 improperly leaks information about decryption failures when decrypting an encrypted key or message data, which makes it easier for remote attackers to recover the plaintext form of a symmetric key via a series of crafted messages. NOTE: this vulnerability exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2011-2487. | ||||
| CVE-2015-0224 | 2 Apache, Redhat | 4 Qpid, Enterprise Mrg, Satellite and 1 more | 2025-04-20 | N/A |
| qpidd in Apache Qpid 0.30 and earlier allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (daemon crash) via a crafted protocol sequence set. NOTE: this vulnerability exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2015-0203. | ||||
| CVE-2016-8745 | 2 Apache, Redhat | 3 Tomcat, Enterprise Linux, Jboss Enterprise Web Server | 2025-04-20 | N/A |
| A bug in the error handling of the send file code for the NIO HTTP connector in Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M13, 8.5.0 to 8.5.8, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.39, 7.0.0 to 7.0.73 and 6.0.16 to 6.0.48 resulted in the current Processor object being added to the Processor cache multiple times. This in turn meant that the same Processor could be used for concurrent requests. Sharing a Processor can result in information leakage between requests including, not not limited to, session ID and the response body. The bug was first noticed in 8.5.x onwards where it appears the refactoring of the Connector code for 8.5.x onwards made it more likely that the bug was observed. Initially it was thought that the 8.5.x refactoring introduced the bug but further investigation has shown that the bug is present in all currently supported Tomcat versions. | ||||
| CVE-2017-3159 | 2 Apache, Redhat | 3 Camel, Jboss Amq, Jboss Fuse | 2025-04-20 | N/A |
| Apache Camel's camel-snakeyaml component is vulnerable to Java object de-serialization vulnerability. De-serializing untrusted data can lead to security flaws. | ||||
| CVE-2016-2161 | 2 Apache, Redhat | 4 Http Server, Enterprise Linux, Jboss Core Services and 1 more | 2025-04-20 | N/A |
| In Apache HTTP Server versions 2.4.0 to 2.4.23, malicious input to mod_auth_digest can cause the server to crash, and each instance continues to crash even for subsequently valid requests. | ||||
| CVE-2016-0762 | 6 Apache, Canonical, Debian and 3 more | 16 Tomcat, Ubuntu Linux, Debian Linux and 13 more | 2025-04-20 | 5.9 Medium |
| The Realm implementations in Apache Tomcat versions 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M9, 8.5.0 to 8.5.4, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.36, 7.0.0 to 7.0.70 and 6.0.0 to 6.0.45 did not process the supplied password if the supplied user name did not exist. This made a timing attack possible to determine valid user names. Note that the default configuration includes the LockOutRealm which makes exploitation of this vulnerability harder. | ||||
| CVE-2017-5659 | 1 Apache | 1 Traffic Server | 2025-04-20 | N/A |
| Apache Traffic Server before 6.2.1 generates a coredump when there is a mismatch between content length and chunked encoding. | ||||
| CVE-2017-7687 | 1 Apache | 1 Mesos | 2025-04-20 | N/A |
| When handling a decoding failure for a malformed URL path of an HTTP request, libprocess in Apache Mesos before 1.1.3, 1.2.x before 1.2.2, 1.3.x before 1.3.1, and 1.4.0-dev might crash because the code accidentally calls inappropriate function. A malicious actor can therefore cause a denial of service of Mesos masters rendering the Mesos-controlled cluster inoperable. | ||||
| CVE-2017-7688 | 1 Apache | 1 Openmeetings | 2025-04-20 | N/A |
| Apache OpenMeetings 1.0.0 updates user password in insecure manner. | ||||
| CVE-2017-7686 | 1 Apache | 1 Ignite | 2025-04-20 | N/A |
| Apache Ignite 1.0.0-RC3 to 2.0 uses an update notifier component to update the users about new project releases that include additional functionality, bug fixes and performance improvements. To do that the component communicates to an external PHP server (http://ignite.run) where it needs to send some system properties like Apache Ignite or Java version. Some of the properties might contain user sensitive information. | ||||
| CVE-2017-7684 | 1 Apache | 1 Openmeetings | 2025-04-20 | N/A |
| Apache OpenMeetings 1.0.0 doesn't check contents of files being uploaded. An attacker can cause a denial of service by uploading multiple large files to the server. | ||||
| CVE-2017-5657 | 1 Apache | 1 Archiva | 2025-04-20 | N/A |
| 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). | ||||
| CVE-2017-7678 | 1 Apache | 1 Spark | 2025-04-20 | N/A |
| In Apache Spark before 2.2.0, it is possible for an attacker to take advantage of a user's trust in the server to trick them into visiting a link that points to a shared Spark cluster and submits data including MHTML to the Spark master, or history server. This data, which could contain a script, would then be reflected back to the user and could be evaluated and executed by MS Windows-based clients. It is not an attack on Spark itself, but on the user, who may then execute the script inadvertently when viewing elements of the Spark web UIs. | ||||