Most recent entries from all

certfr-2022-avi-216 — De multiples vulnérabilités ont été découvertes dans les produits Siemens. Certaines d'entre elles permettent à un atta…

certfr-2022-avi-216

cnvd-2022-17784

EUVD-2026-249469

fkie_cve-2021-42017

A vulnerability has been identified in RUGGEDCOM i800, RUGGEDCOM i801, RUGGEDCOM i802, RUGGEDCOM i803, RUGGEDCOM M2100, RUGGEDCOM M2100F, RUGGEDCOM M2200, RUGGEDCOM M2200F, RUGGEDCOM M969, RUGGEDCOM M969F, RUGGEDCOM RMC30, RUGGEDCOM RMC8388 V4.X, RUGGEDCOM RMC8388 V5.X, RUGGEDCOM RP110, RUGGEDCOM RS1600, RUGGEDCOM RS1600F, RUGGEDCOM RS1600T, RUGGEDCOM RS400, RUGGEDCOM RS400F, RUGGEDCOM RS401, RUGGEDCOM RS416, RUGGEDCOM RS416F, RUGGEDCOM RS416P, RUGGEDCOM RS416PF, RUGGEDCOM RS416Pv2 V4.X, RUGGEDCOM RS416Pv2 V5.X, RUGGEDCOM RS416v2 V4.X, RUGGEDCOM RS416v2 V5.X, RUGGEDCOM RS8000, RUGGEDCOM RS8000A, RUGGEDCOM RS8000H, RUGGEDCOM RS8000T, RUGGEDCOM RS900, RUGGEDCOM RS900 (32M) V4.X, RUGGEDCOM RS900 (32M) V5.X, RUGGEDCOM RS900F, RUGGEDCOM RS900G, RUGGEDCOM RS900G (32M) V4.X, RUGGEDCOM RS900G (32M) V5.X, RUGGEDCOM RS900GF, RUGGEDCOM RS900GP, RUGGEDCOM RS900GPF, RUGGEDCOM RS900L, RUGGEDCOM RS900M-GETS-C01, RUGGEDCOM RS900M-GETS-XX, RUGGEDCOM RS900M-STND-C01, RUGGEDCOM RS900M-STND-XX, RUGGEDCOM RS900W, RUGGEDCOM RS910, RUGGEDCOM RS910L, RUGGEDCOM RS910W, RUGGEDCOM RS920L, RUGGEDCOM RS920W, RUGGEDCOM RS930L, RUGGEDCOM RS930W, RUGGEDCOM RS940G, RUGGEDCOM RS940GF, RUGGEDCOM RS969, RUGGEDCOM RSG2100, RUGGEDCOM RSG2100 (32M) V4.X, RUGGEDCOM RSG2100 (32M) V5.X, RUGGEDCOM RSG2100F, RUGGEDCOM RSG2100P, RUGGEDCOM RSG2100P (32M) V4.X, RUGGEDCOM RSG2100P (32M) V5.X, RUGGEDCOM RSG2100PF, RUGGEDCOM RSG2200, RUGGEDCOM RSG2200F, RUGGEDCOM RSG2288 V4.X, RUGGEDCOM RSG2288 V5.X, RUGGEDCOM RSG2300 V4.X,…

GHSA-v2q7-x3pw-jc98

A vulnerability has been identified in RUGGEDCOM ROS M2100 (All versions < V5.6.0), RUGGEDCOM ROS RMC8388 devices (All versions < V5.6.0), RUGGEDCOM ROS RS416v2 (All versions < V5.6.0), RUGGEDCOM ROS RS900G (All versions < V5.6.0), RUGGEDCOM ROS RS900G (32M) (All versions < V5.6.0), RUGGEDCOM ROS RSG2100 (32M) V5.X (All versions < V5.6.0), RUGGEDCOM ROS RSG2100P (All versions < V5.6.0), RUGGEDCOM ROS RSG2100P (32M) V5.X (All versions < V5.6.0), RUGGEDCOM ROS RSG2288 V5.X (All versions < V5.6.0), RUGGEDCOM ROS RSG2300 V5.X (All versions < V5.6.0), RUGGEDCOM ROS RSG2300P V5.X (All versions < V5.6.0), RUGGEDCOM ROS RSG2488 V5.X (All versions < V5.6.0), RUGGEDCOM ROS RSG900 V5.X (All versions < V5.6.0), RUGGEDCOM ROS RSG920P V5.X (All versions < V5.6.0), RUGGEDCOM ROS RSL910 (All versions < V5.6.0), RUGGEDCOM ROS RST2228 (All versions < V5.6.0), RUGGEDCOM ROS RST916C (All versions < V5.6.0), RUGGEDCOM ROS RST916P (All versions < V5.6.0). A new variant of the POODLE attack has left a third-party component vulnerable due to the implementation flaws of the CBC encryption mode in TLS 1.0 to 1.2. If an attacker were to exploit this, they could act as a man-in-the-middle and eavesdrop on encrypted communications.

gsd-2021-42017

ICSA-22-069-12 — Siemens RUGGEDCOM ROS

Improper neutralization of special characters on the web server configuration page could allow an attacker, in a privileged position, to retrieve sensitive information via cross-site scripting. A timing attack, in a third-party component, could make the retrieval of the private key possible, used for encryption of sensitive data. If a threat actor were to exploit this, the data integrity and security could be compromised. A new variant of the POODLE attack has left a third-party component vulnerable due to the implementation flaws of the CBC encryption mode in TLS 1.0 to 1.2. If an attacker were to exploit this, they could act as a man-in-the-middle and eavesdrop on encrypted communications. Within a third-party component, whenever memory allocation is requested, the out of bound size is not checked. Therefore, if size exceeding the expected allocation is assigned, it could allocate a smaller buffer instead. If an attacker were to exploit this, they could cause a heap overflow. Within a third-party component, the process to allocate partition size fails to check memory boundaries. Therefore, if a large amount is requested by an attacker, due to an integer-wrap around, it could result in a small size being allocated instead. The third-party component, in its TFTP functionality fails to check for null terminations in file names. If an attacker were to exploit this, it could result in data corruption, and possibly a hard-fault of the application.