| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| All versions of Zammad including the latest alpha enable the local zammad user to escalate privileges to root. |
| Zammad versions 6.3.0 to 6.5.4 are vulnerable a session hijack vulnerability that leads to remote code execution as the zammad user. The bug is also present in version 7.0.0 to version 7.1.2, but not exploitable due to changes in the underlying framework. |
| A privilege escalation vulnerability in Kiteworks could have allowed an attacker who had already obtained code execution on one node of a clustered Kiteworks deployment to run operating system commands with elevated privileges on another node of the same cluster. Insufficient input validation in an internal cluster management function let attacker-supplied values reach a privileged execution context; exploitation requires existing access to a node in the cluster, and the affected function is not reachable from outside the cluster. |
| This vulnerability in Veeam Agent for Microsoft Windows allows a low-privileged local user to make the agent write files to arbitrary locations when an administrator installs it. |
| This vulnerability in Veeam Backup Enterprise Manager allows an attacker to execute script in the browser of a portal user who opens a crafted link. |
| This vulnerability in Veeam Backup & Replication allows a Backup Viewer to execute arbitrary code as SYSTEM on the backup server. |
| This vulnerability in Veeam Agent for Microsoft Windows allows any local user to terminate arbitrary processes on the system. |
| A local privilege escalation vulnerability in Kiteworks could have allowed an attacker with an existing shell under a low-privileged service account to escalate to root privileges on the appliance. |
| Kiteworks Core did not correctly validate a parameter submitted to the password reset workflow. An unauthenticated attacker who knew the email address of a user with a locally stored password could potentially reset that account's password without access to the emailed reset link and then authenticate as that user, including where the account holds administrative privileges. |
| A command injection vulnerability in Kiteworks could allow a high-privileged authenticated administrator to execute arbitrary operating-system commands as root on the affected appliance node. Successful exploitation requires an administrative account with elevated privileges. |
| A privilege escalation vulnerability in Kiteworks could allow an attacker who has already obtained code execution as an unprivileged backend service account on the appliance to escalate to root. A privileged routine did not safely handle a filesystem path that the lower-privileged account could influence, allowing the attacker to cause a root-owned operation to run arbitrary commands with the highest privileges. Exploitation requires existing local access to that service account. |
| A privilege escalation vulnerability in Kiteworks could allow an attacker who has already obtained code execution as an unprivileged backend service account on the appliance to escalate to root and run arbitrary commands with the highest privileges. Exploitation requires existing local access to that service account. |
| A function in the Kiteworks Advanced Forms component was reachable without authentication. An unauthenticated attacker could potentially use it to carry out a limited set of internal service operations on the Kiteworks platform; it did not permit access to user accounts, stored files, or form submissions. |
| Kiteworks did not enforce the maximum permitted value for a configurable security-policy setting. An authenticated administrator could set this value outside its intended range so that the associated control never activated, while the control continued to appear enabled in the administrative interface and audit log, allowing it to be silently rendered ineffective. |
| Kiteworks Core contains a business logic flaw in a Kiteworks file-request feature allowed an authenticated user to send a request that appeared to originate from another user, because the server did not verify that the requester was authorized to act as the specified account. This could be used to solicit files or information from a recipient under a trusted identity; exploitation requires the feature to be enabled for the attacker's profile and the targeted recipient to act on the request. |
| Incorrect authorization in DevTools in Google Chrome prior to 155.0.8059.39 allowed a remote attacker leveraging social engineering to leak cross-origin data via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Low) |
| Incomplete cleanup in GetUserMedia in Google Chrome prior to 155.0.8059.39 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process and leveraged social engineering to spoof UI elements via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium) |
| Race condition in Fonts in Google Chrome prior to 155.0.8059.39 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to potentially execute arbitrary code outside the sandbox via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium) |
| Missing authorization in Web Authentication (Passkeys & Security Keys) in Google Chrome prior to 155.0.8059.39 allowed a remote attacker to spoof UI elements via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Low) |
| Integer overflow in WebGL in Google Chrome on on Android prior to 155.0.8059.39 allowed a remote attacker to potentially execute arbitrary code outside the sandbox via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High) |
