Filtered by vendor Tenable
Subscribe
Total
144 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v2 | CVSS v3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2023-0476 | 1 Tenable | 1 Tenable.sc | 2025-04-01 | N/A | 6.5 MEDIUM |
| A LDAP injection vulnerability exists in Tenable.sc due to improper validation of user-supplied input before returning it to users. An authenticated attacker could generate data in Active Directory using the application account through blind LDAP injection. | |||||
| CVE-2023-24493 | 1 Tenable | 1 Tenable.sc | 2025-04-01 | N/A | 5.7 MEDIUM |
| A formula injection vulnerability exists in Tenable.sc due to improper validation of user-supplied input before returning it to users. An authenticated attacker could leverage the reporting system to export reports containing formulas, which would then require a victim to approve and execute on a host. | |||||
| CVE-2023-24495 | 1 Tenable | 1 Tenable.sc | 2025-03-27 | N/A | 6.5 MEDIUM |
| A Server Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability exists in Tenable.sc due to improper validation of session & user-accessible input data. A privileged, authenticated remote attacker could interact with external and internal services covertly. | |||||
| CVE-2023-0524 | 1 Tenable | 3 Nessus, Tenable.io, Tenable.sc | 2025-03-27 | N/A | 8.8 HIGH |
| As part of our Security Development Lifecycle, a potential privilege escalation issue was identified internally. This could allow a malicious actor with sufficient permissions to modify environment variables and abuse an impacted plugin in order to escalate privileges. We have resolved the issue and also made several defense-in-depth fixes alongside. While the probability of successful exploitation is low, Tenable is committed to securing our customers’ environments and our products. The updates have been distributed via the Tenable plugin feed in feed serial numbers equal to or greater than #202212212055. | |||||
| CVE-2022-4313 | 1 Tenable | 2 Nessus, Plugin Feed | 2025-02-27 | N/A | 8.8 HIGH |
| A vulnerability was reported where through modifying the scan variables, an authenticated user in Tenable products, that has Scan Policy Configuration roles, could manipulate audit policy variables to execute arbitrary commands on credentialed scan targets. | |||||
| CVE-2019-11043 | 6 Canonical, Debian, Fedoraproject and 3 more | 23 Ubuntu Linux, Debian Linux, Fedora and 20 more | 2025-02-14 | 7.5 HIGH | 9.8 CRITICAL |
| In PHP versions 7.1.x below 7.1.33, 7.2.x below 7.2.24 and 7.3.x below 7.3.11 in certain configurations of FPM setup it is possible to cause FPM module to write past allocated buffers into the space reserved for FCGI protocol data, thus opening the possibility of remote code execution. | |||||
| CVE-2024-1683 | 1 Tenable | 1 Identity Exposure | 2024-12-17 | N/A | 7.3 HIGH |
| A DLL injection vulnerability exists where an authenticated, low-privileged local attacker could modify application files on the TIE Secure Relay host, which could allow for overriding of the configuration and running of new Secure Relay services. | |||||
| CVE-2023-2005 | 1 Tenable | 3 Nessus, Securitycenter, Tenable.io | 2024-12-03 | N/A | 8.8 HIGH |
| Vulnerability in Tenable Tenable.Io, Tenable Nessus, Tenable Security Center.This issue affects Tenable.Io: before Plugin Feed ID #202306261202 ; Nessus: before Plugin Feed ID #202306261202 ; Security Center: before Plugin Feed ID #202306261202 . This vulnerability could allow a malicious actor with sufficient permissions on a scan target to place a binary in a specific filesystem location, and abuse the impacted plugin in order to escalate privileges. | |||||
| CVE-2024-1367 | 1 Tenable | 1 Security Center | 2024-11-19 | N/A | 7.2 HIGH |
| A command injection vulnerability exists where an authenticated, remote attacker with administrator privileges on the Security Center application could modify Logging parameters, which could lead to the execution of arbitrary code on the Security Center host. | |||||
| CVE-2024-1471 | 1 Tenable | 1 Security Center | 2024-11-19 | N/A | 4.8 MEDIUM |
| An HTML injection vulnerability exists where an authenticated, remote attacker with administrator privileges on the Security Center application could modify Repository parameters, which could lead to HTML redirection attacks. | |||||
| CVE-2023-3252 | 1 Tenable | 1 Nessus | 2024-10-28 | N/A | 6.5 MEDIUM |
| An arbitrary file write vulnerability exists where an authenticated, remote attacker with administrator privileges could alter logging variables to overwrite arbitrary files on the remote host with log data, which could lead to a denial of service condition. | |||||
| CVE-2023-3253 | 1 Tenable | 1 Nessus | 2024-10-28 | N/A | 4.3 MEDIUM |
| An improper authorization vulnerability exists where an authenticated, low privileged remote attacker could view a list of all the users available in the application. | |||||
| CVE-2024-9158 | 1 Tenable | 1 Nessus Network Monitor | 2024-10-07 | N/A | 4.6 MEDIUM |
| A stored cross site scripting vulnerability exists in Nessus Network Monitor where an authenticated, privileged local attacker could inject arbitrary code into the NNM UI via the local CLI. | |||||
| CVE-2023-5623 | 1 Tenable | 1 Nessus Network Monitor | 2024-09-09 | N/A | 7.8 HIGH |
| NNM failed to properly set ACLs on its installation directory, which could allow a low privileged user to run arbitrary code with SYSTEM privileges where NNM is installed to a non-standard location | |||||
| CVE-2024-1891 | 1 Tenable | 1 Security Center | 2024-08-23 | N/A | 5.4 MEDIUM |
| A stored cross site scripting vulnerability exists in Tenable Security Center where an authenticated, remote attacker could inject HTML code into a web application scan result page. | |||||
| CVE-2024-5759 | 1 Tenable | 1 Security Center | 2024-07-19 | N/A | 6.3 MEDIUM |
| An improper privilege management vulnerability exists in Tenable Security Center where an authenticated, remote attacker could view unauthorized objects and launch scans without having the required privileges | |||||
| CVE-2020-1971 | 8 Debian, Fedoraproject, Netapp and 5 more | 46 Debian Linux, Fedora, Active Iq Unified Manager and 43 more | 2024-06-21 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 5.9 MEDIUM |
| The X.509 GeneralName type is a generic type for representing different types of names. One of those name types is known as EDIPartyName. OpenSSL provides a function GENERAL_NAME_cmp which compares different instances of a GENERAL_NAME to see if they are equal or not. This function behaves incorrectly when both GENERAL_NAMEs contain an EDIPARTYNAME. A NULL pointer dereference and a crash may occur leading to a possible denial of service attack. OpenSSL itself uses the GENERAL_NAME_cmp function for two purposes: 1) Comparing CRL distribution point names between an available CRL and a CRL distribution point embedded in an X509 certificate 2) When verifying that a timestamp response token signer matches the timestamp authority name (exposed via the API functions TS_RESP_verify_response and TS_RESP_verify_token) If an attacker can control both items being compared then that attacker could trigger a crash. For example if the attacker can trick a client or server into checking a malicious certificate against a malicious CRL then this may occur. Note that some applications automatically download CRLs based on a URL embedded in a certificate. This checking happens prior to the signatures on the certificate and CRL being verified. OpenSSL's s_server, s_client and verify tools have support for the "-crl_download" option which implements automatic CRL downloading and this attack has been demonstrated to work against those tools. Note that an unrelated bug means that affected versions of OpenSSL cannot parse or construct correct encodings of EDIPARTYNAME. However it is possible to construct a malformed EDIPARTYNAME that OpenSSL's parser will accept and hence trigger this attack. All OpenSSL 1.1.1 and 1.0.2 versions are affected by this issue. Other OpenSSL releases are out of support and have not been checked. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1i (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1h). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2x (Affected 1.0.2-1.0.2w). | |||||
| CVE-2022-0778 | 7 Debian, Fedoraproject, Mariadb and 4 more | 15 Debian Linux, Fedora, Mariadb and 12 more | 2024-06-21 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| The BN_mod_sqrt() function, which computes a modular square root, contains a bug that can cause it to loop forever for non-prime moduli. Internally this function is used when parsing certificates that contain elliptic curve public keys in compressed form or explicit elliptic curve parameters with a base point encoded in compressed form. It is possible to trigger the infinite loop by crafting a certificate that has invalid explicit curve parameters. Since certificate parsing happens prior to verification of the certificate signature, any process that parses an externally supplied certificate may thus be subject to a denial of service attack. The infinite loop can also be reached when parsing crafted private keys as they can contain explicit elliptic curve parameters. Thus vulnerable situations include: - TLS clients consuming server certificates - TLS servers consuming client certificates - Hosting providers taking certificates or private keys from customers - Certificate authorities parsing certification requests from subscribers - Anything else which parses ASN.1 elliptic curve parameters Also any other applications that use the BN_mod_sqrt() where the attacker can control the parameter values are vulnerable to this DoS issue. In the OpenSSL 1.0.2 version the public key is not parsed during initial parsing of the certificate which makes it slightly harder to trigger the infinite loop. However any operation which requires the public key from the certificate will trigger the infinite loop. In particular the attacker can use a self-signed certificate to trigger the loop during verification of the certificate signature. This issue affects OpenSSL versions 1.0.2, 1.1.1 and 3.0. It was addressed in the releases of 1.1.1n and 3.0.2 on the 15th March 2022. Fixed in OpenSSL 3.0.2 (Affected 3.0.0,3.0.1). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1n (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1m). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2zd (Affected 1.0.2-1.0.2zc). | |||||
| CVE-2021-3449 | 12 Checkpoint, Debian, Fedoraproject and 9 more | 167 Multi-domain Management, Multi-domain Management Firmware, Quantum Security Gateway and 164 more | 2024-06-21 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 5.9 MEDIUM |
| An OpenSSL TLS server may crash if sent a maliciously crafted renegotiation ClientHello message from a client. If a TLSv1.2 renegotiation ClientHello omits the signature_algorithms extension (where it was present in the initial ClientHello), but includes a signature_algorithms_cert extension then a NULL pointer dereference will result, leading to a crash and a denial of service attack. A server is only vulnerable if it has TLSv1.2 and renegotiation enabled (which is the default configuration). OpenSSL TLS clients are not impacted by this issue. All OpenSSL 1.1.1 versions are affected by this issue. Users of these versions should upgrade to OpenSSL 1.1.1k. OpenSSL 1.0.2 is not impacted by this issue. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1k (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1j). | |||||
| CVE-2021-23840 | 7 Debian, Fujitsu, Mcafee and 4 more | 27 Debian Linux, M10-1, M10-1 Firmware and 24 more | 2024-06-21 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| Calls to EVP_CipherUpdate, EVP_EncryptUpdate and EVP_DecryptUpdate may overflow the output length argument in some cases where the input length is close to the maximum permissable length for an integer on the platform. In such cases the return value from the function call will be 1 (indicating success), but the output length value will be negative. This could cause applications to behave incorrectly or crash. OpenSSL versions 1.1.1i and below are affected by this issue. Users of these versions should upgrade to OpenSSL 1.1.1j. OpenSSL versions 1.0.2x and below are affected by this issue. However OpenSSL 1.0.2 is out of support and no longer receiving public updates. Premium support customers of OpenSSL 1.0.2 should upgrade to 1.0.2y. Other users should upgrade to 1.1.1j. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1j (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1i). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2y (Affected 1.0.2-1.0.2x). | |||||