| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| Exploitable SQL injection vulnerabilities exist in the authenticated portion of Forma LMS 2.2.1. Specially crafted web requests can cause SQL injections. An attacker can send a web request with parameters containing SQL injection attacks to trigger this vulnerability, potentially allowing exfiltration of the database, user credentials and, in certain configurations, access the underlying operating system. |
| Exploitable SQL injection vulnerabilities exists in the authenticated portion of Forma LMS 2.2.1. Specially crafted web requests can cause SQL injections. An attacker can send a web request with parameters containing SQL injection attacks to trigger this vulnerability, potentially allowing exfiltration of the database, user credentials and, in certain configurations, access the underlying operating system. |
| An exploitable SQL injection vulnerability exists in the unauthenticated portion of eFront LMS, versions v5.2.12 and earlier. Specially crafted web request to login page can cause SQL injections, resulting in data compromise. An attacker can use a browser to trigger these vulnerabilities, and no special tools are required. |
| IBM Emptoris Spend Analysis and IBM Emptoris Strategic Supply Management Platform 10.1.0.x, 10.1.1.x, and 10.1.3.x is vulnerable to SQL injection. A remote attacker could send specially-crafted SQL statements, which could allow the attacker to view, add, modify or delete information in the back-end database. IBM X-Force ID: 173348. |
| IBM Sterling B2B Integrator Standard Edition 5.2.0.0 through 6.0.2.2 is vulnerable to SQL injection. A remote attacker could send specially-crafted SQL statements, which could allow the attacker to view, add, modify or delete information in the back-end database. IBM X-Force ID: 171733. |
| IBM Maximo Asset Management 7.6.0 and 7.6.1 is vulnerable to SQL injection. A remote attacker could send specially-crafted SQL statements, which could allow the attacker to view, add, modify or delete information in the back-end database. IBM X-Force ID: 171437. |
| IBM Business Process Manager 8.5.7.0 through 8.5.7.0 2017.06, 8.6.0.0 through 8.6.0.0 CF2018.03, and IBM Business Automation Workflow 18.0.0.1 through 19.0.0.3 is vulnerable to SQL injection. A remote attacker could send specially-crafted SQL statements, which could allow the attacker to view, add, modify or delete information in the back-end database. IBM X-Force ID: 171254. |
| IBM Jazz Reporting Service (JRS) 6.0.6.1 is vulnerable to SQL injection. A remote attacker could send specially-crafted SQL statements, which could allow the attacker to view, add, modify or delete information in the back-end database. IBM X-Force ID: 170962. |
| IBM Maximo Asset Management 7.6.1.1 is vulnerable to SQL injection. A remote attacker could send specially-crafted SQL statements, which could allow the attacker to view, add, modify or delete information in the back-end database. IBM X-Force ID: 170961. |
| IBM Sterling B2B Integrator Standard Edition 5.2.0.0 through 5.2.6.5 is vulnerable to SQL injection. A remote attacker could send specially-crafted SQL statements, which could allow the attacker to view, add, modify or delete information in the back-end database. IBM X-Force ID: 167881. |
| IBM Sterling B2B Integrator Standard Edition 5.2.0.0 through 5.2.6.5 is vulnerable to SQL injection. A remote attacker could send specially-crafted SQL statements, which could allow the attacker to view, add, modify or delete information in the back-end database. IBM X-Force ID: 167880. |
| IBM Financial Transaction Manager for Digital Payments for Multi-Platform 3.2.0 through 3.2.9 is vulnerable to SQL injection. A remote attacker could send specially-crafted SQL statements, which could allow the attacker to view, add, modify or delete information in the back-end database. IBM X-Force ID: 166801. |
| IBM Contract Management 10.1.0 through 10.1.3 and IBM Emptoris Spend Analysis 10.1.0 through 10.1.3 is vulnerable to SQL injection. A remote attacker could send specially-crafted SQL statements, which could allow the attacker to view, add, modify or delete information in the back-end database. IBM X-Force ID: 164067. |
| IBM Contract Management 10.1.0 through 10.1.3 and IBM Emptoris Spend Analysis 10.1.0 through 10.1.3 is vulnerable to SQL injection. A remote attacker could send specially-crafted SQL statements, which could allow the attacker to view, add, modify or delete information in the back-end database. IBM X-Force ID: 164064. |
| IBM Sterling B2B Integrator Standard Edition 6.0.0.0 through 6.0.2.0 is vulnerable to SQL injection. A remote attacker could send specially-crafted SQL statements, which could allow the attacker to view, add, modify or delete information in the back-end database. IBM X-Force ID: 162715. |
| IBM PureApplication System 2.2.3.0 through 2.2.5.3 is vulnerable to SQL injection. A remote attacker could send specially-crafted SQL statements, which could allow the attacker to view, add, modify or delete information in the back-end database. IBM X-Force ID: 159240. |
| IBM Sterling File Gateway 2.2.0.0 through 6.0.1.0 is vulnerable to SQL injection. A remote attacker could send specially-crafted SQL statements, which could allow the attacker to view, add, modify or delete information in the back-end database. IBM X-Force ID: 158413. |
| IBM Financial Transaction Manager for Digital Payments for Multi-Platform 3.1.0 is vulnerable to SQL injection. A remote attacker could send specially-crafted SQL statements, which could allow the attacker to view, add, modify or delete information in the back-end database. IBM X-ForceID: 155998. |
| IBM BigFix WebUI Profile Management 6 and Software Distribution 23 is vulnerable to SQL injection. A remote attacker could send specially-crafted SQL statements, which could allow the attacker to view, add, modify or delete information in the back-end database. IBM X-Force ID: 155886. |
| This affects Spring Data JPA in versions up to and including 2.1.5, 2.0.13 and 1.11.19. Derived queries using any of the predicates ‘startingWith’, ‘endingWith’ or ‘containing’ could return more results than anticipated when a maliciously crafted query parameter value is supplied. Also, LIKE expressions in manually defined queries could return unexpected results if the parameter values bound did not have escaped reserved characters properly. |
