Total
62 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v2 | CVSS v3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2019-11542 | 2 Ivanti, Pulsesecure | 3 Connect Secure, Pulse Connect Secure, Pulse Policy Secure | 2024-02-27 | 6.5 MEDIUM | 7.2 HIGH |
| In Pulse Secure Pulse Connect Secure version 9.0RX before 9.0R3.4, 8.3RX before 8.3R7.1, 8.2RX before 8.2R12.1, and 8.1RX before 8.1R15.1 and Pulse Policy Secure version 9.0RX before 9.0R3.2, 5.4RX before 5.4R7.1, 5.3RX before 5.3R12.1, 5.2RX before 5.2R12.1, and 5.1RX before 5.1R15.1, an authenticated attacker (via the admin web interface) can send a specially crafted message resulting in a stack buffer overflow. | |||||
| CVE-2016-4787 | 2 Ivanti, Pulsesecure | 2 Connect Secure, Pulse Connect Secure | 2024-02-27 | 6.4 MEDIUM | 10.0 CRITICAL |
| Pulse Connect Secure (PCS) 8.2 before 8.2r1, 8.1 before 8.1r2, 8.0 before 8.0r10, and 7.4 before 7.4r13.4 allow remote attackers to read sensitive system authentication files in an unspecified directory via unknown vectors. | |||||
| CVE-2020-8217 | 2 Ivanti, Pulsesecure | 4 Connect Secure, Policy Secure, Pulse Connect Secure and 1 more | 2024-02-27 | 3.5 LOW | 5.4 MEDIUM |
| A cross site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Pulse Connect Secure <9.1R8 allowed attackers to exploit in the URL used for Citrix ICA. | |||||
| CVE-2020-8222 | 2 Ivanti, Pulsesecure | 4 Connect Secure, Policy Secure, Pulse Connect Secure and 1 more | 2024-02-27 | 4.0 MEDIUM | 6.8 MEDIUM |
| A path traversal vulnerability exists in Pulse Connect Secure <9.1R8 that allowed an authenticated attacker via the administrator web interface to perform an arbitrary file reading vulnerability through Meeting. | |||||
| CVE-2018-14366 | 2 Ivanti, Pulsesecure | 3 Connect Secure, Pulse Connect Secure, Pulse Policy Secure | 2024-02-27 | 5.8 MEDIUM | 6.1 MEDIUM |
| download.cgi in Pulse Secure Pulse Connect Secure 8.1RX before 8.1R13 and 8.3RX before 8.3R4 and Pulse Policy Secure through 5.2RX before 5.2R10 and 5.4RX before 5.4R4 have an Open Redirect Vulnerability. | |||||
| CVE-2018-18284 | 5 Artifex, Canonical, Debian and 2 more | 11 Ghostscript, Gpl Ghostscript, Ubuntu Linux and 8 more | 2023-11-07 | 6.8 MEDIUM | 8.6 HIGH |
| Artifex Ghostscript 9.25 and earlier allows attackers to bypass a sandbox protection mechanism via vectors involving the 1Policy operator. | |||||
| CVE-2018-16513 | 4 Artifex, Canonical, Debian and 1 more | 5 Ghostscript, Gpl Ghostscript, Ubuntu Linux and 2 more | 2023-11-07 | 6.8 MEDIUM | 7.8 HIGH |
| In Artifex Ghostscript before 9.24, attackers able to supply crafted PostScript files could use a type confusion in the setcolor function to crash the interpreter or possibly have unspecified other impact. | |||||
| CVE-2018-15911 | 5 Artifex, Canonical, Debian and 2 more | 11 Ghostscript, Gpl Ghostscript, Ubuntu Linux and 8 more | 2023-11-07 | 6.8 MEDIUM | 7.8 HIGH |
| In Artifex Ghostscript 9.23 before 2018-08-24, attackers able to supply crafted PostScript could use uninitialized memory access in the aesdecode operator to crash the interpreter or potentially execute code. | |||||
| CVE-2018-15910 | 5 Artifex, Canonical, Debian and 2 more | 9 Ghostscript, Gpl Ghostscript, Ubuntu Linux and 6 more | 2023-11-07 | 6.8 MEDIUM | 7.8 HIGH |
| In Artifex Ghostscript before 9.24, attackers able to supply crafted PostScript files could use a type confusion in the LockDistillerParams parameter to crash the interpreter or execute code. | |||||
| CVE-2018-15909 | 5 Artifex, Canonical, Debian and 2 more | 11 Ghostscript, Gpl Ghostscript, Ubuntu Linux and 8 more | 2023-11-07 | 6.8 MEDIUM | 7.8 HIGH |
| In Artifex Ghostscript 9.23 before 2018-08-24, a type confusion using the .shfill operator could be used by attackers able to supply crafted PostScript files to crash the interpreter or potentially execute code. | |||||
| CVE-2020-11581 | 4 Apple, Linux, Oracle and 1 more | 5 Macos, Linux Kernel, Solaris and 2 more | 2021-09-16 | 9.3 HIGH | 8.1 HIGH |
| An issue was discovered in Pulse Secure Pulse Connect Secure (PCS) through 2020-04-06. The applet in tncc.jar, executed on macOS, Linux, and Solaris clients when a Host Checker policy is enforced, allows a man-in-the-middle attacker to perform OS command injection attacks (against a client) via shell metacharacters to the doCustomRemediateInstructions method, because Runtime.getRuntime().exec() is used. | |||||
| CVE-2020-11582 | 4 Apple, Linux, Oracle and 1 more | 5 Macos, Linux Kernel, Solaris and 2 more | 2021-09-16 | 3.3 LOW | 8.8 HIGH |
| An issue was discovered in Pulse Secure Pulse Connect Secure (PCS) through 2020-04-06. The applet in tncc.jar, executed on macOS, Linux, and Solaris clients when a Host Checker policy is enforced, launches a TCP server that accepts local connections on a random port. This can be reached by local HTTP clients, because up to 25 invalid lines are ignored, and because DNS rebinding can occur. (This server accepts, for example, a setcookie command that might be relevant to CVE-2020-11581 exploitation.) | |||||
| CVE-2020-11580 | 4 Apple, Linux, Oracle and 1 more | 5 Macos, Linux Kernel, Solaris and 2 more | 2021-09-16 | 6.4 MEDIUM | 9.1 CRITICAL |
| An issue was discovered in Pulse Secure Pulse Connect Secure (PCS) through 2020-04-06. The applet in tncc.jar, executed on macOS, Linux, and Solaris clients when a Host Checker policy is enforced, accepts an arbitrary SSL certificate. | |||||
| CVE-2020-15408 | 1 Pulsesecure | 2 Pulse Connect Secure, Pulse Secure Desktop Client | 2021-07-21 | 5.8 MEDIUM | 4.6 MEDIUM |
| An issue was discovered in Pulse Secure Pulse Connect Secure before 9.1R8. An authenticated attacker can access the admin page console via the end-user web interface because of a rewrite. | |||||
| CVE-2018-5299 | 1 Pulsesecure | 2 Pulse Connect Secure, Pulse Policy Secure | 2020-08-24 | 7.5 HIGH | 9.8 CRITICAL |
| A stack-based Buffer Overflow Vulnerability exists in the web server in Pulse Secure Pulse Connect Secure (PCS) before 8.3R4 and Pulse Policy Secure (PPS) before 5.4R4, leading to memory corruption and possibly remote code execution. | |||||
| CVE-2018-9849 | 1 Pulsesecure | 1 Pulse Connect Secure | 2019-10-03 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 5.5 MEDIUM |
| Pulse Secure Pulse Connect Secure 8.1.x before 8.1R14, 8.2.x before 8.2R11, and 8.3.x before 8.3R5 do not properly process nested XML entities, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption and memory errors) via a crafted XML document. | |||||
| CVE-2017-17947 | 1 Pulsesecure | 1 Pulse Connect Secure | 2018-02-06 | 3.5 LOW | 4.8 MEDIUM |
| A cross site scripting issue has been found in custompage.cgi in Pulse Secure Pulse Connect Secure (PCS) before 8.0R17.0, 8.1.x before 8.1R13, 8.2.x before 8.2R9, and 8.3.x before 8.3R3 and Pulse Policy Secure (PPS) before 5.2R10, 5.3.x before 5.3R9, and 5.4.x before 5.4R3 due to one of the URL parameters not being sanitized. Exploitation does require the user to be logged in as administrator; the issue is not applicable to the end user portal. | |||||
| CVE-2017-11193 | 1 Pulsesecure | 1 Pulse Connect Secure | 2017-07-20 | 6.8 MEDIUM | 8.8 HIGH |
| Pulse Connect Secure 8.3R1 has CSRF in diag.cgi. In the panel, the diag.cgi file is responsible for running commands such as ping, ping6, traceroute, traceroute6, nslookup, arp, and Portprobe. These functions do not have any protections against CSRF. That can allow an attacker to run these commands against any IP if they can get an admin to visit their malicious CSRF page. | |||||
| CVE-2017-11196 | 1 Pulsesecure | 1 Pulse Connect Secure | 2017-07-19 | 6.8 MEDIUM | 8.8 HIGH |
| Pulse Connect Secure 8.3R1 has CSRF in logout.cgi. The logout function of the admin panel is not protected by any CSRF tokens, thus allowing an attacker to logout a user by making them visit a malicious web page. | |||||
| CVE-2017-11195 | 1 Pulsesecure | 1 Pulse Connect Secure | 2017-07-19 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 6.1 MEDIUM |
| Pulse Connect Secure 8.3R1 has Reflected XSS in launchHelp.cgi. The helpLaunchPage parameter is reflected in an IFRAME element, if the value contains two quotes. It properly sanitizes quotes and tags, so one cannot simply close the src with a quote and inject after that. However, an attacker can use javascript: or data: to abuse this. | |||||