Filtered by vendor Gitlab
Subscribe
Total
1001 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v2 | CVSS v3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2019-15722 | 1 Gitlab | 1 Gitlab | 2020-08-24 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| An issue was discovered in GitLab Community and Enterprise Edition 8.15 through 12.2.1. Particular mathematical expressions in GitLab Markdown can exhaust client resources. | |||||
| CVE-2019-10108 | 1 Gitlab | 1 Gitlab | 2020-08-24 | 5.5 MEDIUM | 5.4 MEDIUM |
| An Incorrect Access Control (issue 1 of 2) was discovered in GitLab Community and Enterprise Edition before 11.7.8, 11.8.x before 11.8.4, and 11.9.x before 11.9.2. It allowed non-members of a private project/group to add and read labels. | |||||
| CVE-2019-9890 | 1 Gitlab | 1 Gitlab | 2020-08-24 | 6.4 MEDIUM | 9.1 CRITICAL |
| An issue was discovered in GitLab Community and Enterprise Edition 10.x and 11.x before 11.6.10, 11.7.x before 11.7.6, and 11.8.x before 11.8.1. It has Insecure Permissions. | |||||
| CVE-2019-6787 | 1 Gitlab | 1 Gitlab | 2020-08-24 | 4.0 MEDIUM | 6.5 MEDIUM |
| An Incorrect Access Control issue was discovered in GitLab Community and Enterprise Edition before 11.5.8, 11.6.x before 11.6.6, and 11.7.x before 11.7.1. The GitLab API allowed project Maintainers and Owners to view the trigger tokens of other project users. | |||||
| CVE-2019-9732 | 1 Gitlab | 1 Gitlab | 2020-08-24 | 7.5 HIGH | 9.8 CRITICAL |
| An issue was discovered in GitLab Community and Enterprise Edition 10.x (starting from 10.8) and 11.x before 11.6.10, 11.7.x before 11.7.6, and 11.8.x before 11.8.1. It has Incorrect Access Control. | |||||
| CVE-2019-9219 | 1 Gitlab | 1 Gitlab | 2020-08-24 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 3.7 LOW |
| An issue was discovered in GitLab Community and Enterprise Edition before 11.6.10, 11.7.x before 11.7.6, and 11.8.x before 11.8.1. It has Incorrect Access Control (issue 2 of 5). | |||||
| CVE-2019-16170 | 1 Gitlab | 1 Gitlab | 2020-08-24 | 5.5 MEDIUM | 7.1 HIGH |
| An issue was discovered in GitLab Enterprise Edition 11.x and 12.x before 12.0.9, 12.1.x before 12.1.9, and 12.2.x before 12.2.5. It has Incorrect Access Control. | |||||
| CVE-2019-9225 | 1 Gitlab | 1 Gitlab | 2020-08-24 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 5.3 MEDIUM |
| An issue was discovered in GitLab Community and Enterprise Edition before 11.6.10, 11.7.x before 11.7.6, and 11.8.x before 11.8.1. It has Incorrect Access Control (issue 5 of 5). | |||||
| CVE-2019-19086 | 1 Gitlab | 1 Gitlab | 2020-08-24 | 4.0 MEDIUM | 4.3 MEDIUM |
| Gitlab Enterprise Edition (EE) before 12.5.1 has Insecure Permissions (issue 1 of 2). | |||||
| CVE-2019-20142 | 1 Gitlab | 1 Gitlab | 2020-08-24 | 4.0 MEDIUM | 4.3 MEDIUM |
| An issue was discovered in GitLab Community Edition (CE) and Enterprise Edition (EE) 12.3 through 12.6.1. It allows Denial of Service. | |||||
| CVE-2019-6789 | 1 Gitlab | 1 Gitlab | 2020-08-24 | 4.0 MEDIUM | 4.3 MEDIUM |
| An issue was discovered in GitLab Community and Enterprise Edition before 11.5.8, 11.6.x before 11.6.6, and 11.7.x before 11.7.1. It allows Information Disclosure (issue 4 of 6). In some cases, users without project permissions will receive emails after a project move. For private projects, this will disclose the new project namespace to an unauthorized user. | |||||
| CVE-2019-13009 | 1 Gitlab | 1 Gitlab | 2020-08-24 | 4.0 MEDIUM | 6.5 MEDIUM |
| An issue was discovered in GitLab Community and Enterprise Edition 9.2 through 12.0.2. Uploaded files associated with unsaved personal snippets were accessible to unauthorized users due to improper permission settings. It has Incorrect Access Control. | |||||
| CVE-2018-19575 | 1 Gitlab | 1 Gitlab | 2020-08-24 | 4.0 MEDIUM | 4.3 MEDIUM |
| GitLab CE/EE, versions 10.1 up to 11.x before 11.3.11, 11.4 before 11.4.8, and 11.5 before 11.5.1, are vulnerable to an insecure direct object reference issue that allows a user to make comments on a locked issue. | |||||
| CVE-2019-19260 | 1 Gitlab | 1 Gitlab | 2020-08-24 | 5.5 MEDIUM | 5.4 MEDIUM |
| GitLab Community Edition (CE) and Enterprise Edition (EE) through 12.5 has Incorrect Access Control (issue 2 of 2). | |||||
| CVE-2019-6797 | 1 Gitlab | 1 Gitlab | 2020-08-24 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| An information disclosure issue was discovered in GitLab Enterprise Edition before 11.5.8, 11.6.x before 11.6.6, and 11.7.x before 11.7.1. The GitHub token used in CI/CD for External Repos was being leaked to project maintainers in the UI. | |||||
| CVE-2018-19584 | 1 Gitlab | 1 Gitlab | 2020-08-24 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| GitLab EE, versions 11.x before 11.3.11, 11.4 before 11.4.8, and 11.5 before 11.5.1, is vulnerable to an insecure direct object reference vulnerability that allows authenticated, but unauthorized, users to view members and milestone details of private groups. | |||||
| CVE-2019-12434 | 1 Gitlab | 1 Gitlab | 2020-08-24 | 4.0 MEDIUM | 4.3 MEDIUM |
| An issue was discovered in GitLab Community and Enterprise Edition 10.6 through 11.11. Users could guess the URL slug of private projects through the contrast of the destination URLs of issues linked in comments. It allows Information Disclosure. | |||||
| CVE-2019-10114 | 1 Gitlab | 1 Gitlab | 2020-08-24 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| An Information Exposure issue (issue 2 of 2) was discovered in GitLab Community and Enterprise Edition before 11.7.8, 11.8.x before 11.8.4, and 11.9.x before 11.9.2. During the OAuth authentication process, the application attempts to validate a parameter in an insecure way, potentially exposing data. | |||||
| CVE-2018-20500 | 1 Gitlab | 1 Gitlab | 2020-08-24 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| An insecure permissions issue was discovered in GitLab Community and Enterprise Edition 9.4 and later but before 11.4.13, 11.5.x before 11.5.6, and 11.6.x before 11.6.1. The runner registration token in the CI/CD settings could not be reset. This was a security risk if one of the maintainers leaves the group and they know the token. | |||||
| CVE-2019-15723 | 1 Gitlab | 1 Gitlab | 2020-08-24 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 5.3 MEDIUM |
| An issue was discovered in GitLab Community and Enterprise Edition 11.9.x and 11.10.x before 11.10.1. Merge requests created by email could be used to bypass push rules in certain situations. | |||||