| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| The All in One SEO WordPress plugin before 4.1.5.3 is affected by a Privilege Escalation issue, which was discovered during an internal audit by the Jetpack Scan team, and may grant bad actors access to protected REST API endpoints they shouldn’t have access to. This could ultimately enable users with low-privileged accounts, like subscribers, to perform remote code execution on affected sites. |
| The Formidable Form Builder WordPress plugin before 4.09.05 allows to inject certain HTML Tags like <audio>,<video>,<img>,<a> and<button>.This could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to exploit a HTML-injection byinjecting a malicous link. The HTML-injection may trick authenticated users to follow the link. If the Link gets clicked, Javascript code can be executed. The vulnerability is due to insufficient sanitization of the "data-frmverify" tag for links in the web-based entry inspection page of affected systems. A successful exploitation incomibantion with CSRF could allow the attacker to perform arbitrary actions on an affected system with the privileges of the user. These actions include stealing the users account by changing their password or allowing attackers to submit their own code through an authenticated user resulting in Remote Code Execution. If an authenticated user who is able to edit Wordpress PHP Code in any kind, clicks the malicious link, PHP code can be edited. |
| The Include Me WordPress plugin through 1.2.1 is vulnerable to path traversal / local file inclusion, which can lead to Remote Code Execution (RCE) of the system due to log poisoning and therefore potentially a full compromise of the underlying structure |
| The Autoptimize WordPress plugin before 2.7.8 attempts to delete malicious files (such as .php) form the uploaded archive via the "Import Settings" feature, after its extraction. However, the extracted folders are not checked and it is possible to upload a zip which contained a directory with PHP file in it and then it is not removed from the disk. It is a bypass of CVE-2020-24948 which allows sending a PHP file via the "Import Settings" functionality to achieve Remote Code Execution. |
| The Fancy Product Designer WordPress plugin before 4.6.9 allows unauthenticated attackers to upload arbitrary files, resulting in remote code execution. |
| The Business Hours Pro WordPress plugin through 5.5.0 allows a remote attacker to upload arbitrary files using its manual update functionality, leading to an unauthenticated remote code execution vulnerability. |
| The run_action function of the Facebook for WordPress plugin before 3.0.0 deserializes user supplied data making it possible for PHP objects to be supplied creating an Object Injection vulnerability. There was also a useable magic method in the plugin that could be used to achieve remote code execution. |
| In the Reponsive Menu (free and Pro) WordPress plugins before 4.0.4, attackers could craft a request and trick an administrator into uploading a zip archive containing malicious PHP files. The attacker could then access those files to achieve remote code execution and further infect the targeted site. |
| In the Reponsive Menu (free and Pro) WordPress plugins before 4.0.4, subscribers could upload zip archives containing malicious PHP files that would get extracted to the /rmp-menu/ directory. These files could then be accessed via the front end of the site to trigger remote code execution and ultimately allow an attacker to execute commands to further infect a WordPress site. |
| .NET Core Remote Code Execution Vulnerability |
| HEVC Video Extensions Remote Code Execution Vulnerability |
| Microsoft Office Remote Code Execution Vulnerability |
| <p>Depending on configuration of various package managers it is possible for an attacker to insert a malicious package into a package manager's repository which can be retrieved and used during development, build, and release processes. This insertion could lead to remote code execution. We believe this vulnerability affects multiple package managers across multiple languages, including but not limited to: Python/pip, .NET/NuGet, Java/Maven, JavaScript/npm.</p>
<p><strong>Attack scenarios</strong></p>
<p>An attacker could take advantage of this ecosystem-wide issue to cause harm in a variety of ways. The original attack scenarios were discovered by Alex Birsan and are detailed in their whitepaper, <a href="https://medium.com/@alex.birsan/dependency-confusion-4a5d60fec610">Dependency Confusion: How I Hacked Into Apple, Microsoft and Dozens of Other Companies</a>.</p>
<ul>
<li><p>With basic knowledge of the target ecosystems, an attacker could create an empty shell for a package and insert malicious code in the install scripts, give it a high version, and publish it to the public repository. Vulnerable victim machines will download the higher version of the package between the public and private repositories and attempt to install it. Due to code incompatibility it will probably error out upon import or upon compilation, making it easier to detect; however the attacker would have gained code execution by that point.</p>
</li>
<li><p>An advanced attacker with some inside knowledge of the target could take a copy of a working package, insert the malicious code (in the package itself or in the install), and then publish it to a public repository. The package will likely install and import correctly, granting the attacker an initial foothold and persistence.</p>
</li>
</ul>
<p>These two methods could affect target organizations at any of these various levels:</p>
<ul>
<li>Developer machines</li>
<li>An entire team if the configuration to import the malicious package is uploaded to a code repository</li>
<li>Continuous integration pipelines if they pull the malicious packages during the build, test, and/or deploy stages</li>
<li>Customers, download servers, production services if the malicious code has not been detected</li>
</ul>
<p>This remote code execution vulnerability can only be addressed by reconfiguring installation tools and workflows, and not by correcting anything in the package repositories themselves. See the <strong>FAQ</strong> section of this CVE for configuration guidance.</p>
|
| Windows TCP/IP Remote Code Execution Vulnerability |
| Windows Graphics Component Remote Code Execution Vulnerability |
| Windows Camera Codec Pack Remote Code Execution Vulnerability |
| HEVC Video Extensions Remote Code Execution Vulnerability |
| Windows Local Spooler Remote Code Execution Vulnerability |
| Windows Address Book Remote Code Execution Vulnerability |
| Microsoft Windows Codecs Library Remote Code Execution Vulnerability |
