Total
549 CVE
CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v2 | CVSS v3 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CVE-2020-10902 | 2 Foxitsoftware, Microsoft | 3 Phantompdf, Reader, Windows | 2023-12-10 | 6.8 MEDIUM | 7.8 HIGH |
This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of Foxit PhantomPDF 9.7.1.29511. User interaction is required to exploit this vulnerability in that the target must visit a malicious page or open a malicious file. The specific flaw exists within the handling of U3D objects in PDF files. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of user-supplied data, which can result in a read past the end of an allocated structure. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the current process. Was ZDI-CAN-10462. | |||||
CVE-2020-10898 | 2 Foxitsoftware, Microsoft | 3 Phantompdf, Reader, Windows | 2023-12-10 | 6.8 MEDIUM | 7.8 HIGH |
This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of Foxit PhantomPDF 9.7.1.29511. User interaction is required to exploit this vulnerability in that the target must visit a malicious page or open a malicious file. The specific flaw exists within the handling of U3D objects in PDF files. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of user-supplied data, which can result in a read past the end of an allocated structure. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the current process. Was ZDI-CAN-10195. | |||||
CVE-2020-10907 | 2 Foxitsoftware, Microsoft | 3 Phantompdf, Reader, Windows | 2023-12-10 | 6.8 MEDIUM | 7.8 HIGH |
This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of Foxit Reader 9.7.1.29511. User interaction is required to exploit this vulnerability in that the target must visit a malicious page or open a malicious file. The specific flaw exists within the handling of widgets in XFA forms. The issue results from the lack of validating the existence of an object prior to performing operations on the object. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the current process. Was ZDI-CAN-10650. | |||||
CVE-2020-10913 | 2 Foxitsoftware, Microsoft | 3 Foxit Reader, Phantompdf, Windows | 2023-12-10 | 6.8 MEDIUM | 7.8 HIGH |
This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of Foxit PhantomPDF 9.7.0.29478. User interaction is required to exploit this vulnerability in that the target must visit a malicious page or open a malicious file. The specific flaw exists within the handling of the OCRAndExportToExcel command of the communication API. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of user-supplied data, which can result in a type confusion condition. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the current process. Was ZDI-CAN-9946. | |||||
CVE-2018-21244 | 1 Foxitsoftware | 1 Phantompdf | 2023-12-10 | 7.5 HIGH | 9.8 CRITICAL |
An issue was discovered in Foxit PhantomPDF before 8.3.6. It allows arbitrary application execution via an embedded executable file in a PDF portfolio, aka FG-VD-18-029. | |||||
CVE-2020-10900 | 2 Foxitsoftware, Microsoft | 3 Phantompdf, Reader, Windows | 2023-12-10 | 6.8 MEDIUM | 7.8 HIGH |
This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of Foxit Reader 9.7.1.29511. User interaction is required to exploit this vulnerability in that the target must visit a malicious page or open a malicious file. The specific flaw exists within the processing of AcroForms. The issue results from the lack of validating the existence of an object prior to performing operations on the object. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the current process. Was ZDI-CAN-10142. | |||||
CVE-2019-20835 | 1 Foxitsoftware | 2 Phantompdf, Reader | 2023-12-10 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 4.3 MEDIUM |
An issue was discovered in Foxit Reader and PhantomPDF before 9.5. It has homograph mishandling. | |||||
CVE-2019-20824 | 1 Foxitsoftware | 1 Phantompdf | 2023-12-10 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
An issue was discovered in Foxit PhantomPDF before 8.3.11. It has a NULL pointer dereference via FXSYS_wcslen in an Epub file. | |||||
CVE-2020-13806 | 1 Foxitsoftware | 2 Phantompdf, Reader | 2023-12-10 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
An issue was discovered in Foxit Reader and PhantomPDF before 9.7.2. It has a use-after-free because of JavaScript execution after a deletion or close operation. | |||||
CVE-2020-10911 | 2 Foxitsoftware, Microsoft | 3 Phantompdf, Reader, Windows | 2023-12-10 | 6.8 MEDIUM | 7.8 HIGH |
This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of Foxit PhantomPDF 9.7.0.29478. User interaction is required to exploit this vulnerability in that the target must visit a malicious page or open a malicious file. The specific flaw exists within the handling of the GetFieldValue command of the communication API. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of user-supplied data, which can result in a type confusion condition. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the current process. Was ZDI-CAN-9944. | |||||
CVE-2020-12248 | 2 Foxitsoftware, Microsoft | 3 Phantompdf, Reader, Windows | 2023-12-10 | 6.8 MEDIUM | 8.8 HIGH |
In Foxit Reader and PhantomPDF before 10.0.1, and PhantomPDF before 9.7.3, attackers can execute arbitrary code via a heap-based buffer overflow because dirty image-resource data is mishandled. | |||||
CVE-2020-13808 | 1 Foxitsoftware | 2 Phantompdf, Reader | 2023-12-10 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
An issue was discovered in Foxit Reader and PhantomPDF before 9.7.2. It allows resource consumption via crafted cross-reference stream data. | |||||
CVE-2018-21237 | 1 Foxitsoftware | 1 Phantompdf | 2023-12-10 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 5.3 MEDIUM |
An issue was discovered in Foxit PhantomPDF before 8.3.7. It allows NTLM credential theft via a GoToE or GoToR action. | |||||
CVE-2019-20827 | 1 Foxitsoftware | 2 Phantompdf, Reader | 2023-12-10 | 7.5 HIGH | 9.8 CRITICAL |
An issue was discovered in Foxit PhantomPDF Mac 3.3 and Foxit Reader for Mac before 3.3. It allows stack consumption because of interaction between ICC-Based color space and Alternate color space. | |||||
CVE-2019-20815 | 1 Foxitsoftware | 1 Phantompdf | 2023-12-10 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
An issue was discovered in Foxit PhantomPDF before 8.3.12. It allows stack consumption via nested function calls for XML parsing. | |||||
CVE-2020-13810 | 1 Foxitsoftware | 2 Phantompdf, Reader | 2023-12-10 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
An issue was discovered in Foxit Reader and PhantomPDF before 9.7.2. It allows signature validation bypass via a modified file or a file with non-standard signatures. | |||||
CVE-2019-20825 | 1 Foxitsoftware | 1 Phantompdf | 2023-12-10 | 7.5 HIGH | 9.8 CRITICAL |
An issue was discovered in Foxit PhantomPDF before 8.3.11. It has an out-of-bounds write when Internet Explorer is used. | |||||
CVE-2020-10910 | 2 Foxitsoftware, Microsoft | 3 Phantompdf, Reader, Windows | 2023-12-10 | 6.8 MEDIUM | 7.8 HIGH |
This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of Foxit PhantomPDF 9.7.0.29478. User interaction is required to exploit this vulnerability in that the target must visit a malicious page or open a malicious file. The specific flaw exists within the handling of the RotatePage command of the communication API. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of user-supplied data, which can result in a type confusion condition. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the current process. Was ZDI-CAN-9943. | |||||
CVE-2019-20813 | 1 Foxitsoftware | 1 Phantompdf | 2023-12-10 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
An issue was discovered in Foxit PhantomPDF before 8.3.12. It has a NULL pointer dereference. | |||||
CVE-2020-13805 | 1 Foxitsoftware | 2 Phantompdf, Reader | 2023-12-10 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 9.8 CRITICAL |
An issue was discovered in Foxit Reader and PhantomPDF before 9.7.2. It has brute-force attack mishandling because the CAS service lacks a limit on login failures. |