| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| Multiple cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerabilities on the D-Link DI-524 Wireless Router with firmware 9.01 allow remote attackers to (1) change the admin password, (2) reboot the device, or (3) possibly have unspecified other impact via crafted requests to CGI programs. |
| Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) exists in Hashtopus 1.5g via the password parameter to admin.php in an a=config action. |
| D-Link DCS cameras have a weak/insecure CrossDomain.XML file that allows sites hosting malicious Flash objects to access and/or change the device's settings via a CSRF attack. This is because of the 'allow-access-from domain' child element set to *, thus accepting requests from any domain. If a victim logged into the camera's web console visits a malicious site hosting a malicious Flash file from another Browser tab, the malicious Flash file then can send requests to the victim's DCS series Camera without knowing the credentials. An attacker can host a malicious Flash file that can retrieve Live Feeds or information from the victim's DCS series Camera, add new admin users, or make other changes to the device. Known affected devices are DCS-933L with firmware before 1.13.05, DCS-5030L, DCS-5020L, DCS-2530L, DCS-2630L, DCS-930L, DCS-932L, and DCS-932LB1. |
| The Comcast firmware on Cisco DPC3939B (firmware version dpc3939b-v303r204217-150321a-CMCST) devices allows configuration changes via CSRF. |
| A Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) issue was discovered in Westermo MRD-305-DIN versions older than 1.7.5.0, and MRD-315, MRD-355, MRD-455 versions older than 1.7.5.0. The application does not verify whether a request was intentionally provided by the user, making it possible for an attacker to trick a user into making a malicious request to the server. |
| Multiple JasperReports Server components contain vulnerabilities which may allow authorized users to perform cross-site scripting (XSS) and cross-site request forgery (CSRF) attacks. The impact of this vulnerability includes the theoretical disclosure of sensitive information. Affects TIBCO JasperReports Server (versions 6.1.1 and below, 6.2.0, 6.2.1, and 6.3.0), TIBCO JasperReports Server Community Edition (versions 6.3.0 and below), TIBCO JasperReports Server for ActiveMatrix BPM (versions 6.2.0 and below), TIBCO Jaspersoft for AWS with Multi-Tenancy (versions 6.2.0 and below), and TIBCO Jaspersoft Reporting and Analytics for AWS (versions 6.2.0 and below). |
| CSRF exists in Webmin 1.850. By sending a GET request to at/create_job.cgi containing dir=/&cmd= in the URI, an attacker to execute arbitrary commands. |
| In phpMyFAQ before 2.9.9, there is Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) for modifying a glossary. |
| In Apache Brooklyn before 0.10.0, the REST server is vulnerable to cross-site request forgery (CSRF), which could permit a malicious web site to produce a link which, if clicked whilst a user is logged in to Brooklyn, would cause the server to execute the attacker's commands as the user. There is known to be a proof-of-concept exploit using this vulnerability. |
| IBM Tivoli Storage Manager for Virtual Environments 7.1 (VMware) is vulnerable to cross-site request forgery which could allow an attacker to execute malicious and unauthorized actions transmitted from a user that the website trusts. IBM Reference #: 1995545. |
| Jensen of Scandinavia AS Air:Link 3G (AL3G) version 2.23m (Rev. 3), Air:Link 5000AC (AL5000AC) version 1.13, and Air:Link 59300 (AL59300) version 1.04 (Rev. 4) devices allow remote attackers to conduct CSRF attacks via certain /goform/* pages. |
| SocuSoft Flash Slideshow Maker Professional through v5.20, when the advanced configuration is used, has an xml_path HTTP parameter that trusts user-supplied input, in conjunction with an unsafe XML configuration file. This has resultant content forgery, cross site scripting, and unvalidated redirection issues. |
| Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Corega CG-WLR300NX firmware Ver. 1.20 and earlier allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of logged in user to conduct unintended operations via unspecified vectors. |
| Subversion Plugin connects to a user-specified Subversion repository as part of form validation (e.g. to retrieve a list of tags). This functionality improperly checked permissions, allowing any user with Item/Build permission (but not Item/Configure) to connect to any web server or Subversion server and send credentials with a known ID, thereby possibly capturing them. Additionally, this functionality did not require POST requests be used, thereby allowing the above to be performed without direct access to Jenkins via Cross-Site Request Forgery attacks. |
| Cross-Site Request Forgery exists in OctoberCMS 1.0.426 (aka Build 426) due to improper validation of CSRF tokens for postback handling, allowing an attacker to successfully take over the victim's account. The attack bypasses a protection mechanism involving X-CSRF headers and CSRF tokens via a certain _handler postback variable. |
| In WordPress before 4.7.5, there is improper handling of post meta data values in the XML-RPC API. |
| public/rolechangeadmin in Faveo 1.9.3 allows CSRF. The impact is obtaining admin privileges. |
| IBM Interact 8.6, 9.0, 9.1, and 10.0 is vulnerable to cross-site request forgery which could allow an attacker to execute malicious and unauthorized actions transmitted from a user that the website trusts. IBM X-Force ID: 115085. |
| diag.cgi in Pulse Connect Secure 8.2R1 through 8.2R5, 8.1R1 through 8.1R10 and Pulse Policy Secure 5.3R1 through 5.3R5, 5.2R1 through 5.2R8, and 5.1R1 through 5.1R10 allow remote attackers to hijack the authentication of administrators for requests to start tcpdump, related to the lack of anti-CSRF tokens. |
| Git Plugin connects to a user-specified Git repository as part of form validation. An attacker with no direct access to Jenkins but able to guess at a username/password credentials ID could trick a developer with job configuration permissions into following a link with a maliciously crafted Jenkins URL which would result in the Jenkins Git client sending the username and password to an attacker-controlled server. |
