| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| Multiple unspecified vulnerabilities in (1) Net6Helper.DLL (aka Net6Launcher Class) 4.5.2 and earlier, (2) npCtxCAO.dll (aka Citrix Endpoint Analysis Client) in a Firefox plugin directory, and (3) a second npCtxCAO.dll (aka CCAOControl Object) before 4.5.0.0 in Citrix Access Gateway Standard Edition before 4.5.5 and Advanced Edition before 4.5 HF1 have unknown impact and attack vectors, possibly related to buffer overflows. NOTE: vector 3 might overlap CVE-2007-3679. |
| xend in Xen 3.0.3 does not properly limit the contents of the /local/domain xenstore directory tree, and does not properly restrict a guest VM's write access within this tree, which allows guest OS users to cause a denial of service and possibly have unspecified other impact by writing to (1) console/tty, (2) console/limit, or (3) image/device-model-pid. NOTE: this issue was originally reported as an issue in libvirt 0.3.3 and xenstore, but CVE is considering the core issue to be related to Xen. |
| The Secure Gateway service in Citrix Secure Gateway 3.1 and earlier allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (CPU consumption) via an unspecified request. |
| The Independent Management Architecture (IMA) service (ImaSrv.exe) in Citrix MetaFrame XP 1.0 and 2.0, and Presentation Server 3.0 and 4.0, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (service exit) via a crafted packet that causes the service to access an unmapped memory address and triggers an unhandled exception. |
| Heap-based buffer overflow in the SendChannelData function in wfica.ocx in Citrix Presentation Server Client before 9.230 for Windows allows remote malicious web sites to execute arbitrary code via a DataSize parameter that is less than the length of the Data buffer. |
| Heap-based buffer overflow in the IMA_SECURE_DecryptData1 function in ImaSystem.dll for Citrix MetaFrame XP 1.0 and 2.0, and Presentation Server 3.0 and 4.0, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via requests to the Independent Management Architecture (IMA) service (ImaSrv.exe) with invalid size values that trigger the overflow during decryption. |
| The web portal interface in Citrix Access Gateway (aka Citrix Advanced Access Control) before Advanced Edition 4.5 HF1 places a session ID in the URL, which allows context-dependent attackers to hijack sessions by reading "residual information", including the a referer log, browser history, or browser cache. |
| Static code injection vulnerability in config/writeconfig.php in the sample code in the XenServer Resource Kit in Citrix XenCenterWeb allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary PHP code into include/config.ini.php via the pool1 parameter. NOTE: some of these details are obtained from third party information. |
| Citrix Presentation Server Client for Windows before 10.200 does not clear "credential information" from process memory in unspecified circumstances, which might allow local users to gain privileges. |
| The Session Reliability Service (XTE) in Citrix MetaFrame Presentation Server 3.0, Presentation Server 4.0, and Access Essentials 1.0 and 1.5, allows remote attackers to bypass network security policies and connect to arbitrary TCP ports via a modified address:port string. |
| The web management interface in Citrix NetScaler 8.0 build 47.8 stores the device's primary IP address in a cookie, which might allow remote attackers to obtain sensitive network configuration information if this address is not the same as the address being used by the web interface. |
| Unspecified vulnerability in Citrix Presentation Server Client for Windows before 10.0 allows remote web sites to execute arbitrary code via unspecified vectors, related to the implementation of ICA connectivity through proxy servers. |
| Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the web-based administration console in Citrix Access Gateway before firmware 4.5.5 allows remote attackers to perform certain configuration changes as administrators. |
| Citrix Access Gateway Advanced Edition before firmware 4.5.5 allows attackers to redirect users to arbitrary web sites and conduct phishing attacks via unknown vectors. |
| dne2000.sys in Citrix Deterministic Network Enhancer (DNE) 2.21.7.233 through 3.21.7.17464, as used in (1) Cisco VPN Client, (2) Blue Coat WinProxy, and (3) SafeNet SoftRemote and HighAssurance Remote, allows local users to gain privileges via a crafted DNE_IOCTL DeviceIoControl request to the \\.\DNE device interface. |
| Unspecified vulnerability in Citrix Advanced Access Control (AAC) Option 4.0, and Access Gateway 4.2 with Advanced Access Control 4.2, before 20061114, when the Browser-Only access feature is enabled, allows remote authenticated users to bypass access policies via a certain login method, a different issue than CVE-2006-4846. NOTE: some of these details are obtained from third party information. |
| xend in Xen 3.3.0 does not properly restrict a guest VM's write access within the /local/domain xenstore directory tree, which allows guest OS users to cause a denial of service and possibly have unspecified other impact by writing to (1) console/tty, (2) console/limit, or (3) image/device-model-pid. NOTE: this issue exists because of erroneous set_permissions calls in the fix for CVE-2008-4405. |
| Untrusted search path vulnerability in Citrix MetaFrame Presentation Server allows local users to gain privileges via a malicious icabar.exe placed in the search path. |
| Stack-based buffer overflow in the print provider library (cpprov.dll) in Citrix Presentation Server 4.0, MetaFrame Presentation Server 3.0, and MetaFrame XP 1.0 allows local users and remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via long arguments to the (1) EnumPrintersW and (2) OpenPrinter functions. |
| Unspecified vulnerability in Citrix XenApp (formerly Presentation Server) 4.5 Feature Pack 1 and earlier, Presentation Server 4.0, and Access Essentials 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 allows local users to gain privileges via unknown attack vectors related to creating an unspecified file. NOTE: this might be the same issue as CVE-2008-3485, but the vendor advisory is too vague to be certain. |
