CWE-522
Allowed-with-ReviewInsufficiently Protected Credentials
Abstraction: Class · Status: Incomplete
The product transmits or stores authentication credentials, but it uses an insecure method that is susceptible to unauthorized interception and/or retrieval.
2083 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-JMP2-CVFP-6GR9
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-27 06:31 – Updated: 2026-05-27 06:31Hitachi Vantara Pentaho Data Integration & Analytics versions before 10.2.0.6 and 11.0.0.0, including 9.3.x and 8.3.x, expose Hadoop cluster credentials in plain text through the Cluster Test API. Although the user should not see those explicitly, the defect is mitigated by the fact the user can already leverage those credentials to submit jobs under the same account through the backend API.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-2255"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-522"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-05-27T04:16:26Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Hitachi Vantara Pentaho Data Integration \u0026 Analytics versions before 10.2.0.6 and 11.0.0.0, including\u00a09.3.x and 8.3.x, expose Hadoop cluster credentials in plain text through the Cluster Test API. Although\u00a0the user should not see those explicitly, the defect is mitigated by the fact the user can already\u00a0leverage those credentials to submit jobs under the same account through the backend API.",
"id": "GHSA-jmp2-cvfp-6gr9",
"modified": "2026-05-27T06:31:34Z",
"published": "2026-05-27T06:31:34Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-2255"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.pentaho.com/hc/en-us/articles/45672235545101--Resolved-Hitachi-Vantara-Pentaho-Data-Integration-Analytics-Insufficiently-Protected-Credentials-Versions-before-10-2-0-6-and-11-0-0-0-Impacted-CVE-2026-2255"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-JMP9-F42Q-4G85
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:08 – Updated: 2023-01-05 21:44Harvest SCM Plugin 0.5.1 and earlier stores SCM passwords unencrypted in its global configuration file hudson.plugins.harvest.HarvestSCM.xml and in job config.xml files on the Jenkins controller. These credentials can be viewed by users with Extended Read permission (job config.xml only) or access to the Jenkins controller file system (both).
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "org.jenkins-ci.plugins:harvest"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"last_affected": "0.5.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2020-2130"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-256",
"CWE-522"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2023-01-05T21:44:12Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2020-02-12T15:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Harvest SCM Plugin 0.5.1 and earlier stores SCM passwords unencrypted in its global configuration file `hudson.plugins.harvest.HarvestSCM.xml and in job config.xml` files on the Jenkins controller. These credentials can be viewed by users with Extended Read permission (job config.xml only) or access to the Jenkins controller file system (both).",
"id": "GHSA-jmp9-f42q-4g85",
"modified": "2023-01-05T21:44:12Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T17:08:48Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-2130"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/jenkinsci/harvest-plugin"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://jenkins.io/security/advisory/2020-02-12/#SECURITY-1553"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2020/02/12/3"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Passwords stored in plain text by Harvest SCM Plugin"
}
GHSA-JMPM-4H56-G275
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:26 – Updated: 2024-04-04 02:55In Sonatype Nexus Repository 3.26.1, an S3 secret key can be exposed by an admin user.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2020-24622"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-200",
"CWE-522"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2020-08-25T19:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "In Sonatype Nexus Repository 3.26.1, an S3 secret key can be exposed by an admin user.",
"id": "GHSA-jmpm-4h56-g275",
"modified": "2024-04-04T02:55:58Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T17:26:33Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-24622"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://issues.sonatype.org/browse/NEXUS-25019"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://support.sonatype.com/hc/en-us/articles/360053516793"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-JMQQ-X5G9-9P2W
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-10-08 16:30 – Updated: 2026-10-08 16:30Impact
When a request is replayed onto a different host, the client updates only the current request and leaves the target request pointing at the original host. Four consumers read that stale value, and each one sends the first host's request, credentials, or both to the second host.
A replay happens through documented, ordinary features: a ResponseFilter that returns a different request, which is the supported failover pattern, and the IOException retry path. The attacker does not need to induce the replay; an application that uses failover produces it by design.
- The socket to host B is filed in the connection pool under host A's key. A later request the application addresses to A is served over the connection to B, and A's
Authorizationheader goes to B. - Over a CONNECT tunnel, the client tunnels to B and negotiates TLS with B correctly, then writes A's request into that tunnel. B receives A's path, A's
Host, and A'sAuthorization. TLS does not protect against this, because the handshake really is with B, so no certificate mismatch occurs. - The replay reuses the original realm, so A's credentials are regenerated onto a replay request that carries no realm of its own. The cross-origin redirect path strips realms for exactly this reason; the replay path never did.
- The stale value also decides whether TLS is used at all. When the original request was
http://and the replay ishttps://, no SSL handler is installed and the replayed request, credentials included, is written in cleartext.
Affected versions
- 3.x: up to and including 3.0.12
- 2.x: up to and including 2.16.0
Both lines are affected identically. This is long-standing behaviour, not a recent regression.
Patches
Fixed in 3.0.13 on the 3.x line and in 2.16.1 on the 2.x line. The target request now moves when a request is replayed, and the proxy moves with it: the proxy is part of the connection pool key, so correcting only the host would convert a harmless pool miss into a hit and route a proxied connection to a direct request.
Workarounds
Do not use a ResponseFilter that replays to a different host, and disable request retries, if the client is configured with credentials or used through a proxy. Replaying to the same host is not affected.
Details
NettyRequestSender.newNettyRequestAndResponseFuture calls setCurrentRequest without setTargetRequest, and replayRequest does not move the target either. The stale target is then read by the pool key derivation in NettyResponseFuture, by ConnectSuccessInterceptor when it writes the tunnelled request, by the realm selection in NettyRequestSender, and by NettyConnectListener when it decides whether to install an SSL handler.
Existing replay tests do not cover this, because all of them replay to the same host.
{
"affected": [
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 3.0.12"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "org.asynchttpclient:async-http-client"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "3.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "3.0.13"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
},
{
"database_specific": {
"last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 2.16.0"
},
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "org.asynchttpclient:async-http-client"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "2.0.0"
},
{
"fixed": "2.16.1"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-107282"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-319",
"CWE-441",
"CWE-522"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-10-08T16:30:46Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-10-07T22:17:04Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "### Impact\nWhen a request is replayed onto a different host, the client updates only the current request and leaves the target request pointing at the original host. Four consumers read that stale value, and each one sends the first host\u0027s request, credentials, or both to the second host.\n\nA replay happens through documented, ordinary features: a `ResponseFilter` that returns a different request, which is the supported failover pattern, and the IOException retry path. The attacker does not need to induce the replay; an application that uses failover produces it by design.\n\n* The socket to host B is filed in the connection pool under host A\u0027s key. A later request the application addresses to A is served over the connection to B, and A\u0027s `Authorization` header goes to B.\n* Over a CONNECT tunnel, the client tunnels to B and negotiates TLS with B correctly, then writes A\u0027s request into that tunnel. B receives A\u0027s path, A\u0027s `Host`, and A\u0027s `Authorization`. TLS does not protect against this, because the handshake really is with B, so no certificate mismatch occurs.\n* The replay reuses the original realm, so A\u0027s credentials are regenerated onto a replay request that carries no realm of its own. The cross-origin redirect path strips realms for exactly this reason; the replay path never did.\n* The stale value also decides whether TLS is used at all. When the original request was `http://` and the replay is `https://`, no SSL handler is installed and the replayed request, credentials included, is written in cleartext.\n\n### Affected versions\n* 3.x: up to and including 3.0.12\n* 2.x: up to and including 2.16.0\n\nBoth lines are affected identically. This is long-standing behaviour, not a recent regression.\n\n### Patches\nFixed in 3.0.13 on the 3.x line and in 2.16.1 on the 2.x line. The target request now moves when a request is replayed, and the proxy moves with it: the proxy is part of the connection pool key, so correcting only the host would convert a harmless pool miss into a hit and route a proxied connection to a direct request.\n\n### Workarounds\nDo not use a `ResponseFilter` that replays to a different host, and disable request retries, if the client is configured with credentials or used through a proxy. Replaying to the same host is not affected.\n\n### Details\n`NettyRequestSender.newNettyRequestAndResponseFuture` calls `setCurrentRequest` without `setTargetRequest`, and `replayRequest` does not move the target either. The stale target is then read by the pool key derivation in `NettyResponseFuture`, by `ConnectSuccessInterceptor` when it writes the tunnelled request, by the realm selection in `NettyRequestSender`, and by `NettyConnectListener` when it decides whether to install an SSL handler.\n\nExisting replay tests do not cover this, because all of them replay to the same host.",
"id": "GHSA-jmqq-x5g9-9p2w",
"modified": "2026-10-08T16:30:46Z",
"published": "2026-10-08T16:30:46Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/AsyncHttpClient/async-http-client/security/advisories/GHSA-jmqq-x5g9-9p2w"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-107282"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/AsyncHttpClient/async-http-client/commit/15b254514a411623e5f1d8c99ea79c0f82f8a466"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/AsyncHttpClient/async-http-client/commit/bbc31aed3b044f9f7a126cf689a8c8d7ad2ae1cb"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/AsyncHttpClient/async-http-client"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/AsyncHttpClient/async-http-client/releases/tag/async-http-client-project-2.16.1"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/AsyncHttpClient/async-http-client/releases/tag/async-http-client-project-3.0.13"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/SA:N",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "AsyncHttpClient: Replay to a different host sends the original host request and credentials to the new host"
}
GHSA-JMR8-R558-3JHX
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-09-15 18:32 – Updated: 2026-10-09 20:51Duplicate Advisory
This advisory has been withdrawn because it is a duplicate of GHSA-88f6-4rjv-x774. This link is maintained to preserve external references.
Original Description
Vikunja before 2.6.0 continues to expose the raw TOTP shared secret after enrollment through the GET /api/v1/user/settings/totp and /api/v1/user/settings/totp/qrcode endpoints without re-authentication. Attackers with a valid access token can read the secret, import it into their own authenticator, and generate valid codes indefinitely to defeat the second factor and enable account takeover.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Go",
"name": "code.vikunja.io/api"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"last_affected": "2.5.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-522"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2026-10-09T20:51:10Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2026-09-15T16:17:55Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "### Duplicate Advisory\nThis advisory has been withdrawn because it is a duplicate of GHSA-88f6-4rjv-x774. This link is maintained to preserve external references.\n\n### Original Description\nVikunja before 2.6.0 continues to expose the raw TOTP shared secret after enrollment through the GET /api/v1/user/settings/totp and /api/v1/user/settings/totp/qrcode endpoints without re-authentication. Attackers with a valid access token can read the secret, import it into their own authenticator, and generate valid codes indefinitely to defeat the second factor and enable account takeover.",
"id": "GHSA-jmr8-r558-3jhx",
"modified": "2026-10-09T20:51:10Z",
"published": "2026-09-15T18:32:30Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/go-vikunja/vikunja/security/advisories/GHSA-88f6-4rjv-x774"
},
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-91982"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/vikunja-before-2.6.0-totp-secret-disclosure-via-api"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:N/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
],
"summary": "Duplicate Advisory: Vikunja: TOTP secret is readable after enrollment, no step-up auth",
"withdrawn": "2026-10-09T20:51:10Z"
}
GHSA-JMRV-RXGR-PHVR
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-07-09 18:30 – Updated: 2025-11-05 20:14Jenkins Applitools Eyes Plugin 1.16.5 and earlier does not mask Applitools API keys displayed on the job configuration form, increasing the potential for attackers to observe and capture them.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "org.jenkins-ci.plugins:applitools-eyes"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"last_affected": "1.16.5"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-53743"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-522"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2025-07-09T22:38:56Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2025-07-09T16:15:27Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "Jenkins Applitools Eyes Plugin 1.16.5 and earlier does not mask Applitools API keys displayed on the job configuration form, increasing the potential for attackers to observe and capture them.",
"id": "GHSA-jmrv-rxgr-phvr",
"modified": "2025-11-05T20:14:18Z",
"published": "2025-07-09T18:30:47Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-53743"
},
{
"type": "PACKAGE",
"url": "https://github.com/jenkinsci/applitools-eyes-plugin"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.jenkins.io/security/advisory/2025-07-09/#SECURITY-3510"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2025/07/09/4"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Jenkins Applitools Eyes Plugin vulnerability does not mask API keys on its job configuration form"
}
GHSA-JP5M-X7CP-GJ98
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-04-14 18:30 – Updated: 2026-04-14 18:30A insufficiently protected credentials vulnerability in Fortinet FortiSandbox 5.0.0 through 5.0.5, FortiSandbox 4.4 all versions, FortiSandbox PaaS 5.0.1 through 5.0.5 may allow an authenticathed administrator to read LDAP server credentials via client-side inspection.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2026-27316"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-522"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2026-04-14T16:16:37Z",
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "A insufficiently protected credentials vulnerability in Fortinet FortiSandbox 5.0.0 through 5.0.5, FortiSandbox 4.4 all versions, FortiSandbox PaaS 5.0.1 through 5.0.5 may allow an authenticathed administrator to read LDAP server credentials via client-side inspection.",
"id": "GHSA-jp5m-x7cp-gj98",
"modified": "2026-04-14T18:30:35Z",
"published": "2026-04-14T18:30:35Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-27316"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://fortiguard.fortinet.com/psirt/FG-IR-26-113"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-JP8R-JH5J-CGWF
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 16:56 – Updated: 2023-02-23 21:56CodeScan Plugin stores an API key unencrypted in its global configuration file com.villagechief.codescan.jenkins.CodeScanBuilder.xml on the Jenkins controller. This API key can be viewed by users with access to the Jenkins controller file system.
As of publication of this advisory, there is no fix.
{
"affected": [
{
"package": {
"ecosystem": "Maven",
"name": "com.villagechief.codescan.jenkins:codescan"
},
"ranges": [
{
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"last_affected": "1.0"
}
],
"type": "ECOSYSTEM"
}
]
}
],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2019-10423"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-522"
],
"github_reviewed": true,
"github_reviewed_at": "2023-02-23T21:56:37Z",
"nvd_published_at": "2019-09-25T16:15:00Z",
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "CodeScan Plugin stores an API key unencrypted in its global configuration file `com.villagechief.codescan.jenkins.CodeScanBuilder.xml` on the Jenkins controller. This API key can be viewed by users with access to the Jenkins controller file system.\n\nAs of publication of this advisory, there is no fix.",
"id": "GHSA-jp8r-jh5j-cgwf",
"modified": "2023-02-23T21:56:37Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T16:56:46Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-10423"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/jenkinsci/codescan-plugin"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://jenkins.io/security/advisory/2019-09-25/#SECURITY-1551"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2019/09/25/3"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
],
"summary": "Jenkins CodeScan Plugin has Insufficiently Protected Credentials"
}
GHSA-JP98-7C67-GJQV
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-11-23 21:30 – Updated: 2022-11-28 21:30An issue in the /index/user/user_edit.html component of YJCMS v1.0.9 allows unauthenticated attackers to obtain the Administrator account password.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-45276"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-425",
"CWE-522"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2022-11-23T21:15:00Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "An issue in the /index/user/user_edit.html component of YJCMS v1.0.9 allows unauthenticated attackers to obtain the Administrator account password.",
"id": "GHSA-jp98-7c67-gjqv",
"modified": "2022-11-28T21:30:23Z",
"published": "2022-11-23T21:30:31Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-45276"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/Zoe0427/YJCMS"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-JPMP-7HR8-C4XP
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2023-12-13 21:30 – Updated: 2023-12-13 21:30A credential disclosure vulnerability in Palo Alto Networks PAN-OS software enables an authenticated read-only administrator to obtain the plaintext credentials of stored external system integrations such as LDAP, SCP, RADIUS, TACACS+, and SNMP from the web interface.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2023-6791"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-522"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2023-12-13T19:15:09Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A credential disclosure vulnerability in Palo Alto Networks PAN-OS software enables an authenticated read-only administrator to obtain the plaintext credentials of stored external system integrations such as LDAP, SCP, RADIUS, TACACS+, and SNMP from the web interface.",
"id": "GHSA-jpmp-7hr8-c4xp",
"modified": "2023-12-13T21:30:31Z",
"published": "2023-12-13T21:30:31Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-6791"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://security.paloaltonetworks.com/CVE-2023-6791"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
Mitigation
Use an appropriate security mechanism to protect the credentials.
Mitigation
Make appropriate use of cryptography to protect the credentials.
Mitigation
Use industry standards to protect the credentials (e.g. LDAP, keystore, etc.).
CAPEC-102: Session Sidejacking
Session sidejacking takes advantage of an unencrypted communication channel between a victim and target system. The attacker sniffs traffic on a network looking for session tokens in unencrypted traffic. Once a session token is captured, the attacker performs malicious actions by using the stolen token with the targeted application to impersonate the victim. This attack is a specific method of session hijacking, which is exploiting a valid session token to gain unauthorized access to a target system or information. Other methods to perform a session hijacking are session fixation, cross-site scripting, or compromising a user or server machine and stealing the session token.
CAPEC-474: Signature Spoofing by Key Theft
An attacker obtains an authoritative or reputable signer's private signature key by theft and then uses this key to forge signatures from the original signer to mislead a victim into performing actions that benefit the attacker.
CAPEC-50: Password Recovery Exploitation
An attacker may take advantage of the application feature to help users recover their forgotten passwords in order to gain access into the system with the same privileges as the original user. Generally password recovery schemes tend to be weak and insecure.
CAPEC-509: Kerberoasting
Through the exploitation of how service accounts leverage Kerberos authentication with Service Principal Names (SPNs), the adversary obtains and subsequently cracks the hashed credentials of a service account target to exploit its privileges. The Kerberos authentication protocol centers around a ticketing system which is used to request/grant access to services and to then access the requested services. As an authenticated user, the adversary may request Active Directory and obtain a service ticket with portions encrypted via RC4 with the private key of the authenticated account. By extracting the local ticket and saving it disk, the adversary can brute force the hashed value to reveal the target account credentials.
CAPEC-551: Modify Existing Service
When an operating system starts, it also starts programs called services or daemons. Modifying existing services may break existing services or may enable services that are disabled/not commonly used.
CAPEC-555: Remote Services with Stolen Credentials
This pattern of attack involves an adversary that uses stolen credentials to leverage remote services such as RDP, telnet, SSH, and VNC to log into a system. Once access is gained, any number of malicious activities could be performed.
CAPEC-560: Use of Known Domain Credentials
An adversary guesses or obtains (i.e. steals or purchases) legitimate credentials (e.g. userID/password) to achieve authentication and to perform authorized actions under the guise of an authenticated user or service.
CAPEC-561: Windows Admin Shares with Stolen Credentials
An adversary guesses or obtains (i.e. steals or purchases) legitimate Windows administrator credentials (e.g. userID/password) to access Windows Admin Shares on a local machine or within a Windows domain.
CAPEC-600: Credential Stuffing
An adversary tries known username/password combinations against different systems, applications, or services to gain additional authenticated access. Credential Stuffing attacks rely upon the fact that many users leverage the same username/password combination for multiple systems, applications, and services.
CAPEC-644: Use of Captured Hashes (Pass The Hash)
An adversary obtains (i.e. steals or purchases) legitimate Windows domain credential hash values to access systems within the domain that leverage the Lan Man (LM) and/or NT Lan Man (NTLM) authentication protocols.
CAPEC-645: Use of Captured Tickets (Pass The Ticket)
An adversary uses stolen Kerberos tickets to access systems/resources that leverage the Kerberos authentication protocol. The Kerberos authentication protocol centers around a ticketing system which is used to request/grant access to services and to then access the requested services. An adversary can obtain any one of these tickets (e.g. Service Ticket, Ticket Granting Ticket, Silver Ticket, or Golden Ticket) to authenticate to a system/resource without needing the account's credentials. Depending on the ticket obtained, the adversary may be able to access a particular resource or generate TGTs for any account within an Active Directory Domain.
CAPEC-652: Use of Known Kerberos Credentials
An adversary obtains (i.e. steals or purchases) legitimate Kerberos credentials (e.g. Kerberos service account userID/password or Kerberos Tickets) with the goal of achieving authenticated access to additional systems, applications, or services within the domain.
CAPEC-653: Use of Known Operating System Credentials
An adversary guesses or obtains (i.e. steals or purchases) legitimate operating system credentials (e.g. userID/password) to achieve authentication and to perform authorized actions on the system, under the guise of an authenticated user or service. This applies to any Operating System.