The (1) ListView, (2) ListView2, (3) TreeView, and (4) TreeView2 ActiveX controls in MSCOMCTL.OCX in the Common Controls in Microsoft Office 2003 SP3, 2007 SP2 and SP3, and 2010 Gold and SP1; Office 2003 Web Components SP3; SQL Server 2000 SP4, 2005 SP4, and 2008 SP2, SP3, and R2; BizTalk Server 2002 SP1; Commerce Server 2002 SP4, 2007 SP2, and 2009 Gold and R2; Visual FoxPro 8.0 SP1 and 9.0 SP2; and Visual Basic 6.0 Runtime allow remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted (a) web site, (b) Office document, or (c) .rtf file that triggers "system state" corruption, as exploited in the wild in April 2012, aka "MSCOMCTL.OCX RCE Vulnerability."

The TabStrip ActiveX control in the Common Controls in MSCOMCTL.OCX in Microsoft Office 2003 SP3, Office 2003 Web Components SP3, Office 2007 SP2 and SP3, Office 2010 SP1, SQL Server 2000 SP4, SQL Server 2005 SP4, SQL Server 2008 SP2, SP3, R2, R2 SP1, and R2 SP2, Commerce Server 2002 SP4, Commerce Server 2007 SP2, Commerce Server 2009 Gold and R2, Host Integration Server 2004 SP1, Visual FoxPro 8.0 SP1, Visual FoxPro 9.0 SP2, and Visual Basic 6.0 Runtime allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted (1) document or (2) web page that triggers system-state corruption, aka "MSCOMCTL.OCX RCE Vulnerability."

Some OCC API endpoints in SAP Commerce Cloud allows Personally Identifiable Information (PII) data, such as passwords, email addresses, mobile numbers, coupon codes, and voucher codes, to be included in the request URL as query or path parameters. On successful exploitation, this could lead to a High impact on confidentiality and integrity of the application.

Due to a lack of proper input validation, SAP Commerce Webservices 2.0 (Swagger UI) - versions 1905, 2005, 2105, 2011, 2205, allows malicious inputs from untrusted sources, which can be leveraged by an attacker to execute a DOM Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) attack.  As a result, an attacker may be able to steal user tokens and achieve a full account takeover including access to administrative tools in SAP Commerce.

An attacker can change the content of an SAP Commerce - versions 1905, 2005, 2105, 2011, 2205, login page through a manipulated URL. They can inject code that allows them to redirect submissions from the affected login form to their own server. This allows them to steal credentials and hijack accounts. A successful attack could compromise the Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability of the system.

If configured to use an Oracle database and if a query is created using the flexible search java api with a parameterized "in" clause, SAP Commerce - versions 1905, 2005, 2105, 2011, allows attacker to execute crafted database queries, exposing backend database. The vulnerability is present if the parameterized "in" clause accepts more than 1000 values.

SAP Commerce - versions 2105.3, 2011.13, 2005.18, 1905.34, does not perform necessary authorization checks for an authenticated user, resulting in escalation of privileges. Authenticated attackers will be able to access and edit data from b2b units they do not belong to.

SAP Commerce (Backoffice Search), versions - 1808, 1811, 1905, 2005, 2011, allows a low privileged user to search for attributes which are not supposed to be displayed to them. Although the search results are masked, the user can iteratively enter one character at a time to search and determine the masked attribute value thereby leading to information disclosure.

SAP Commerce, versions - 1808, 1811, 1905, 2005, 2011, Backoffice application allows certain authorized users to create source rules which are translated to drools rule when published to certain modules within the application. An attacker with this authorization can inject malicious code in the source rules and perform remote code execution enabling them to compromise the confidentiality, integrity and availability of the application.

SAP Commerce Cloud, versions - 1808,1811,1905,2005,2011, enables certain users with required privileges to edit drools rules, an authenticated attacker with this privilege will be able to inject malicious code in the drools rules which when executed leads to Remote Code Execution vulnerability enabling the attacker to compromise the underlying host enabling him to impair confidentiality, integrity and availability of the application.