| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| Persistent Cross Site Scripting in Web Applications operating on Business-DNA Solutions GmbH’s TopEase® Platform Version <= 7.1.27 via the Structure Component allows an authenticated remote attacker with Object Modification privileges to inject arbitrary HTML and JavaScript code in an object attribute, which is then rendered in the Structure Component, to alter the intended functionality and steal cookies, the latter allowing for account takeover. |
| Missing HTTPOnly flag in Web Applications operating on Business-DNA Solutions GmbH’s TopEase® Platform Version <= 7.1.27 allows an unauthenticated remote attacker to escalate privileges from unauthenticated to authenticated user via stealing and injecting the session- independent and static cookie UID. |
| Unnecessary privilege vulnerabilities in the Web Console of Trend Micro Apex One, Apex One as a Service and Worry-Free Business Security 10.0 SP1 could allow a local attacker to escalate privileges on affected installations. Please note: an attacker must first obtain the ability to execute low-privileged code on the target system in order to exploit this vulnerability. |
| Unnecessary privilege vulnerabilities in Trend Micro Apex One, Apex One as a Service, Worry-Free Business Security 10.0 SP1 and Worry-Free Business Security Services could allow a local attacker to escalate privileges on affected installations. Please note: an attacker must first obtain the ability to execute low-privileged code on the target system in order to exploit this vulnerability. This vulnerability is similar to but not identical to CVE-2021-42104, 42105 and 42106. |
| Unnecessary privilege vulnerabilities in Trend Micro Apex One, Apex One as a Service, Worry-Free Business Security 10.0 SP1 and Worry-Free Business Security Services could allow a local attacker to escalate privileges on affected installations. Please note: an attacker must first obtain the ability to execute low-privileged code on the target system in order to exploit this vulnerability. This vulnerability is similar to but not identical to CVE-2021-42104, 42105 and 42107. |
| Unnecessary privilege vulnerabilities in Trend Micro Apex One, Apex One as a Service, Worry-Free Business Security 10.0 SP1 and Worry-Free Business Security Services could allow a local attacker to escalate privileges on affected installations. Please note: an attacker must first obtain the ability to execute low-privileged code on the target system in order to exploit this vulnerability. This vulnerability is similar to but not identical to CVE-2021-42104, 42106 and 42107. |
| Unnecessary privilege vulnerabilities in Trend Micro Apex One, Apex One as a Service, Worry-Free Business Security 10.0 SP1 and Worry-Free Business Security Services could allow a local attacker to escalate privileges on affected installations. Please note: an attacker must first obtain the ability to execute low-privileged code on the target system in order to exploit this vulnerability. This vulnerability is similar to but not identical to CVE-2021-42105, 42106 and 42107. |
| An uncontrolled search path element vulnerabilities in Trend Micro Apex One and Apex One as a Service could allow a local attacker to escalate privileges on affected installations. An attacker must first obtain the ability to execute low-privileged code on the target system in order to exploit this vulnerability. This vulnerability is similar but not identical to CVE-2021-42101. |
| An uncontrolled search path element vulnerabilities in Trend Micro Apex One and Apex One as a Service agents could allow a local attacker to escalate privileges on affected installations. An attacker must first obtain the ability to execute low-privileged code on the target system in order to exploit this vulnerability. |
| An uncontrolled search path element vulnerabilities in Trend Micro Apex One and Apex One as a Service could allow a local attacker to escalate privileges on affected installations. An attacker must first obtain the ability to execute low-privileged code on the target system in order to exploit this vulnerability. This vulnerability is similar but not identical to CVE-2021-42103. |
| An incomplete permission check on entries in Devolutions Remote Desktop Manager before 2021.2.16 allows attackers to bypass permissions via batch custom PowerShell. |
| GNU Mailman before 2.1.35 may allow remote Privilege Escalation. A csrf_token value is not specific to a single user account. An attacker can obtain a value within the context of an unprivileged user account, and then use that value in a CSRF attack against an admin (e.g., for account takeover). |
| Xshell before 7.0.0.76 allows attackers to cause a crash by triggering rapid changes to the title bar. |
| An issue was discovered in Zammad before 4.1.1. An admin can execute code on the server via a crafted request that manipulates triggers. |
| An issue was discovered in Zammad before 4.1.1. The REST API discloses sensitive information. |
| An issue was discovered in Zammad before 4.1.1. An Agent account can modify account data, and gain admin access, via a crafted request. |
| An issue was discovered in Barrier before 2.3.4. An attacker can cause memory exhaustion in the barriers component (aka the server-side implementation of Barrier) and barrierc by sending long TCP messages. |
| An issue was discovered in Barrier before 2.3.4. The barriers component (aka the server-side implementation of Barrier) does not correctly close file descriptors for established TCP connections. An unauthenticated remote attacker can thus cause file descriptor exhaustion in the server process, leading to denial of service. |
| An issue was discovered in Barrier before 2.3.4. An unauthenticated attacker can cause a segmentation fault in the barriers component (aka the server-side implementation of Barrier) by quickly opening and closing TCP connections while sending a Hello message for each TCP session. |
| An issue was discovered in Barrier before 2.4.0. An attacker can enter an active session state with the barriers component (aka the server-side implementation of Barrier) simply by supplying a client label that identifies a valid client configuration. This label is "Unnamed" by default but could instead be guessed from hostnames or other publicly available information. In the active session state, an attacker can capture input device events from the server, and also modify the clipboard content on the server. |
