Show filters
13 Total Results
Displaying 1-10 of 13
Sort by:
Attacker Value
Unknown

CVE-2020-1710

Disclosure Date: September 16, 2020 (last updated November 28, 2024)
The issue appears to be that JBoss EAP 6.4.21 does not parse the field-name in accordance to RFC7230[1] as it returns a 200 instead of a 400.
Attacker Value
Unknown

CVE-2020-10693

Disclosure Date: May 06, 2020 (last updated November 08, 2023)
A flaw was found in Hibernate Validator version 6.1.2.Final. A bug in the message interpolation processor enables invalid EL expressions to be evaluated as if they were valid. This flaw allows attackers to bypass input sanitation (escaping, stripping) controls that developers may have put in place when handling user-controlled data in error messages.
Attacker Value
Unknown

CVE-2019-10219

Disclosure Date: November 08, 2019 (last updated November 08, 2023)
A vulnerability was found in Hibernate-Validator. The SafeHtml validator annotation fails to properly sanitize payloads consisting of potentially malicious code in HTML comments and instructions. This vulnerability can result in an XSS attack.
Attacker Value
Unknown

CVE-2019-14838

Disclosure Date: October 14, 2019 (last updated November 27, 2024)
A flaw was found in wildfly-core before 7.2.5.GA. The Management users with Monitor, Auditor and Deployer Roles should not be allowed to modify the runtime state of the server
Attacker Value
Unknown

CVE-2019-10086

Disclosure Date: August 20, 2019 (last updated November 08, 2023)
In Apache Commons Beanutils 1.9.2, a special BeanIntrospector class was added which allows suppressing the ability for an attacker to access the classloader via the class property available on all Java objects. We, however were not using this by default characteristic of the PropertyUtilsBean.
Attacker Value
Unknown

CVE-2019-9515

Disclosure Date: August 13, 2019 (last updated January 15, 2025)
Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to a settings flood, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker sends a stream of SETTINGS frames to the peer. Since the RFC requires that the peer reply with one acknowledgement per SETTINGS frame, an empty SETTINGS frame is almost equivalent in behavior to a ping. Depending on how efficiently this data is queued, this can consume excess CPU, memory, or both.
Attacker Value
Unknown

Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to a header leak, potentially leadin…

Disclosure Date: August 13, 2019 (last updated January 15, 2025)
Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to a header leak, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker sends a stream of headers with a 0-length header name and 0-length header value, optionally Huffman encoded into 1-byte or greater headers. Some implementations allocate memory for these headers and keep the allocation alive until the session dies. This can consume excess memory.
Attacker Value
Unknown

CVE-2019-9514

Disclosure Date: August 13, 2019 (last updated January 15, 2025)
Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to a reset flood, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker opens a number of streams and sends an invalid request over each stream that should solicit a stream of RST_STREAM frames from the peer. Depending on how the peer queues the RST_STREAM frames, this can consume excess memory, CPU, or both.
Attacker Value
Unknown

CVE-2019-9513

Disclosure Date: August 13, 2019 (last updated January 15, 2025)
Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to resource loops, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker creates multiple request streams and continually shuffles the priority of the streams in a way that causes substantial churn to the priority tree. This can consume excess CPU.
Attacker Value
Unknown

CVE-2019-9518

Disclosure Date: August 13, 2019 (last updated January 15, 2025)
Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to a flood of empty frames, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker sends a stream of frames with an empty payload and without the end-of-stream flag. These frames can be DATA, HEADERS, CONTINUATION and/or PUSH_PROMISE. The peer spends time processing each frame disproportionate to attack bandwidth. This can consume excess CPU.