Filtered by vendor Apache
Subscribe
Total
2168 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v2 | CVSS v3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2019-10072 | 1 Apache | 1 Tomcat | 2023-12-08 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| The fix for CVE-2019-0199 was incomplete and did not address HTTP/2 connection window exhaustion on write in Apache Tomcat versions 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.19 and 8.5.0 to 8.5.40 . By not sending WINDOW_UPDATE messages for the connection window (stream 0) clients were able to cause server-side threads to block eventually leading to thread exhaustion and a DoS. | |||||
| CVE-2017-5664 | 1 Apache | 1 Tomcat | 2023-12-08 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| The error page mechanism of the Java Servlet Specification requires that, when an error occurs and an error page is configured for the error that occurred, the original request and response are forwarded to the error page. This means that the request is presented to the error page with the original HTTP method. If the error page is a static file, expected behaviour is to serve content of the file as if processing a GET request, regardless of the actual HTTP method. The Default Servlet in Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M20, 8.5.0 to 8.5.14, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.43 and 7.0.0 to 7.0.77 did not do this. Depending on the original request this could lead to unexpected and undesirable results for static error pages including, if the DefaultServlet is configured to permit writes, the replacement or removal of the custom error page. Notes for other user provided error pages: (1) Unless explicitly coded otherwise, JSPs ignore the HTTP method. JSPs used as error pages must must ensure that they handle any error dispatch as a GET request, regardless of the actual method. (2) By default, the response generated by a Servlet does depend on the HTTP method. Custom Servlets used as error pages must ensure that they handle any error dispatch as a GET request, regardless of the actual method. | |||||
| CVE-2018-1336 | 4 Apache, Canonical, Debian and 1 more | 9 Tomcat, Ubuntu Linux, Debian Linux and 6 more | 2023-12-08 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| An improper handing of overflow in the UTF-8 decoder with supplementary characters can lead to an infinite loop in the decoder causing a Denial of Service. Versions Affected: Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M9 to 9.0.7, 8.5.0 to 8.5.30, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.51, and 7.0.28 to 7.0.86. | |||||
| CVE-2016-0706 | 3 Apache, Canonical, Debian | 3 Tomcat, Ubuntu Linux, Debian Linux | 2023-12-08 | 4.0 MEDIUM | 4.3 MEDIUM |
| Apache Tomcat 6.x before 6.0.45, 7.x before 7.0.68, 8.x before 8.0.31, and 9.x before 9.0.0.M2 does not place org.apache.catalina.manager.StatusManagerServlet on the org/apache/catalina/core/RestrictedServlets.properties list, which allows remote authenticated users to bypass intended SecurityManager restrictions and read arbitrary HTTP requests, and consequently discover session ID values, via a crafted web application. | |||||
| CVE-2017-5647 | 1 Apache | 1 Tomcat | 2023-12-08 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| A bug in the handling of the pipelined requests in Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M18, 8.5.0 to 8.5.12, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.42, 7.0.0 to 7.0.76, and 6.0.0 to 6.0.52, when send file was used, results in the pipelined request being lost when send file processing of the previous request completed. This could result in responses appearing to be sent for the wrong request. For example, a user agent that sent requests A, B and C could see the correct response for request A, the response for request C for request B and no response for request C. | |||||
| CVE-2017-5650 | 1 Apache | 1 Tomcat | 2023-12-08 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| In Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M18 and 8.5.0 to 8.5.12, the handling of an HTTP/2 GOAWAY frame for a connection did not close streams associated with that connection that were currently waiting for a WINDOW_UPDATE before allowing the application to write more data. These waiting streams each consumed a thread. A malicious client could therefore construct a series of HTTP/2 requests that would consume all available processing threads. | |||||
| CVE-2017-7675 | 1 Apache | 1 Tomcat | 2023-12-08 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| The HTTP/2 implementation in Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M21 and 8.5.0 to 8.5.15 bypassed a number of security checks that prevented directory traversal attacks. It was therefore possible to bypass security constraints using a specially crafted URL. | |||||
| CVE-2016-6794 | 6 Apache, Canonical, Debian and 3 more | 14 Tomcat, Ubuntu Linux, Debian Linux and 11 more | 2023-12-08 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 5.3 MEDIUM |
| When a SecurityManager is configured, a web application's ability to read system properties should be controlled by the SecurityManager. In Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M9, 8.5.0 to 8.5.4, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.36, 7.0.0 to 7.0.70, 6.0.0 to 6.0.45 the system property replacement feature for configuration files could be used by a malicious web application to bypass the SecurityManager and read system properties that should not be visible. | |||||
| CVE-2016-0714 | 3 Apache, Canonical, Debian | 3 Tomcat, Ubuntu Linux, Debian Linux | 2023-12-08 | 6.5 MEDIUM | 8.8 HIGH |
| The session-persistence implementation in Apache Tomcat 6.x before 6.0.45, 7.x before 7.0.68, 8.x before 8.0.31, and 9.x before 9.0.0.M2 mishandles session attributes, which allows remote authenticated users to bypass intended SecurityManager restrictions and execute arbitrary code in a privileged context via a web application that places a crafted object in a session. | |||||
| CVE-2018-8037 | 2 Apache, Debian | 2 Tomcat, Debian Linux | 2023-12-08 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 5.9 MEDIUM |
| If an async request was completed by the application at the same time as the container triggered the async timeout, a race condition existed that could result in a user seeing a response intended for a different user. An additional issue was present in the NIO and NIO2 connectors that did not correctly track the closure of the connection when an async request was completed by the application and timed out by the container at the same time. This could also result in a user seeing a response intended for another user. Versions Affected: Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M9 to 9.0.9 and 8.5.5 to 8.5.31. | |||||
| CVE-2016-8735 | 1 Apache | 1 Tomcat | 2023-12-08 | 7.5 HIGH | 9.8 CRITICAL |
| Remote code execution is possible with Apache Tomcat before 6.0.48, 7.x before 7.0.73, 8.x before 8.0.39, 8.5.x before 8.5.7, and 9.x before 9.0.0.M12 if JmxRemoteLifecycleListener is used and an attacker can reach JMX ports. The issue exists because this listener wasn't updated for consistency with the CVE-2016-3427 Oracle patch that affected credential types. | |||||
| CVE-2017-5648 | 1 Apache | 1 Tomcat | 2023-12-08 | 6.4 MEDIUM | 9.1 CRITICAL |
| While investigating bug 60718, it was noticed that some calls to application listeners in Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M17, 8.5.0 to 8.5.11, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.41, and 7.0.0 to 7.0.75 did not use the appropriate facade object. When running an untrusted application under a SecurityManager, it was therefore possible for that untrusted application to retain a reference to the request or response object and thereby access and/or modify information associated with another web application. | |||||
| CVE-2018-1305 | 4 Apache, Canonical, Debian and 1 more | 6 Tomcat, Ubuntu Linux, Debian Linux and 3 more | 2023-12-08 | 4.0 MEDIUM | 6.5 MEDIUM |
| Security constraints defined by annotations of Servlets in Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.4, 8.5.0 to 8.5.27, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.49 and 7.0.0 to 7.0.84 were only applied once a Servlet had been loaded. Because security constraints defined in this way apply to the URL pattern and any URLs below that point, it was possible - depending on the order Servlets were loaded - for some security constraints not to be applied. This could have exposed resources to users who were not authorised to access them. | |||||
| CVE-2018-1304 | 5 Apache, Canonical, Debian and 2 more | 11 Tomcat, Ubuntu Linux, Debian Linux and 8 more | 2023-12-08 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 5.9 MEDIUM |
| The URL pattern of "" (the empty string) which exactly maps to the context root was not correctly handled in Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.4, 8.5.0 to 8.5.27, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.49 and 7.0.0 to 7.0.84 when used as part of a security constraint definition. This caused the constraint to be ignored. It was, therefore, possible for unauthorised users to gain access to web application resources that should have been protected. Only security constraints with a URL pattern of the empty string were affected. | |||||
| CVE-2019-0232 | 2 Apache, Microsoft | 2 Tomcat, Windows | 2023-12-08 | 9.3 HIGH | 8.1 HIGH |
| When running on Windows with enableCmdLineArguments enabled, the CGI Servlet in Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.17, 8.5.0 to 8.5.39 and 7.0.0 to 7.0.93 is vulnerable to Remote Code Execution due to a bug in the way the JRE passes command line arguments to Windows. The CGI Servlet is disabled by default. The CGI option enableCmdLineArguments is disable by default in Tomcat 9.0.x (and will be disabled by default in all versions in response to this vulnerability). For a detailed explanation of the JRE behaviour, see Markus Wulftange's blog (https://codewhitesec.blogspot.com/2016/02/java-and-command-line-injections-in-windows.html) and this archived MSDN blog (https://web.archive.org/web/20161228144344/https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/twistylittlepassagesallalike/2011/04/23/everyone-quotes-command-line-arguments-the-wrong-way/). | |||||
| CVE-2016-8745 | 1 Apache | 1 Tomcat | 2023-12-08 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| A bug in the error handling of the send file code for the NIO HTTP connector in Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M13, 8.5.0 to 8.5.8, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.39, 7.0.0 to 7.0.73 and 6.0.16 to 6.0.48 resulted in the current Processor object being added to the Processor cache multiple times. This in turn meant that the same Processor could be used for concurrent requests. Sharing a Processor can result in information leakage between requests including, not not limited to, session ID and the response body. The bug was first noticed in 8.5.x onwards where it appears the refactoring of the Connector code for 8.5.x onwards made it more likely that the bug was observed. Initially it was thought that the 8.5.x refactoring introduced the bug but further investigation has shown that the bug is present in all currently supported Tomcat versions. | |||||
| CVE-2016-0762 | 6 Apache, Canonical, Debian and 3 more | 15 Tomcat, Ubuntu Linux, Debian Linux and 12 more | 2023-12-08 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 5.9 MEDIUM |
| The Realm implementations in Apache Tomcat versions 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M9, 8.5.0 to 8.5.4, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.36, 7.0.0 to 7.0.70 and 6.0.0 to 6.0.45 did not process the supplied password if the supplied user name did not exist. This made a timing attack possible to determine valid user names. Note that the default configuration includes the LockOutRealm which makes exploitation of this vulnerability harder. | |||||
| CVE-2019-0199 | 1 Apache | 1 Tomcat | 2023-12-08 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| The HTTP/2 implementation in Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.14 and 8.5.0 to 8.5.37 accepted streams with excessive numbers of SETTINGS frames and also permitted clients to keep streams open without reading/writing request/response data. By keeping streams open for requests that utilised the Servlet API's blocking I/O, clients were able to cause server-side threads to block eventually leading to thread exhaustion and a DoS. | |||||
| CVE-2016-6796 | 6 Apache, Canonical, Debian and 3 more | 15 Tomcat, Ubuntu Linux, Debian Linux and 12 more | 2023-12-08 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| A malicious web application running on Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M9, 8.5.0 to 8.5.4, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.36, 7.0.0 to 7.0.70 and 6.0.0 to 6.0.45 was able to bypass a configured SecurityManager via manipulation of the configuration parameters for the JSP Servlet. | |||||
| CVE-2018-11784 | 6 Apache, Canonical, Debian and 3 more | 15 Tomcat, Ubuntu Linux, Debian Linux and 12 more | 2023-12-08 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 4.3 MEDIUM |
| When the default servlet in Apache Tomcat versions 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.11, 8.5.0 to 8.5.33 and 7.0.23 to 7.0.90 returned a redirect to a directory (e.g. redirecting to '/foo/' when the user requested '/foo') a specially crafted URL could be used to cause the redirect to be generated to any URI of the attackers choice. | |||||