Export limit exceeded: 94763 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
Search
Search Results (94763 CVEs found)
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2020-1614 | 1 Juniper | 2 Junos, Nfx250 | 2024-11-21 | 10 Critical |
| A Use of Hard-coded Credentials vulnerability exists in the NFX250 Series for the vSRX Virtual Network Function (VNF) instance, which allows an attacker to take control of the vSRX VNF instance if they have the ability to access an administrative service (e.g. SSH) on the VNF, either locally, or through the network. This issue only affects the NFX250 Series vSRX VNF. No other products or platforms are affected. This issue is only applicable to environments where the vSRX VNF root password has not been configured. This issue affects the Juniper Networks NFX250 Network Services Platform vSRX VNF instance on versions prior to 19.2R1. | ||||
| CVE-2020-1613 | 1 Juniper | 46 Ex2300, Ex2300-c, Ex3400 and 43 more | 2024-11-21 | 8.6 High |
| A vulnerability in the BGP FlowSpec implementation may cause a Juniper Networks Junos OS device to terminate an established BGP session upon receiving a specific BGP FlowSpec advertisement. The BGP NOTIFICATION message that terminates an established BGP session is sent toward the peer device that originally sent the specific BGP FlowSpec advertisement. This specific BGP FlowSpec advertisement received from a BGP peer might get propagated from a Junos OS device running the fixed release to another device that is vulnerable causing BGP session termination downstream. This issue affects IPv4 and IPv6 BGP FlowSpec deployment. This issue affects Juniper Networks Junos OS: 12.3; 12.3X48 on SRX Series; 14.1X53 on EX and QFX Series; 15.1 versions prior to 15.1R7-S5; 15.1F versions prior to 15.1F6-S13; 15.1X49 versions prior to 15.1X49-D180 on SRX Series; 15.1X53 versions prior to 15.1X53-D238 on QFX5200/QFX5110; 15.1X53 versions prior to 15.1X53-D497 on NFX Series; 15.1X53 versions prior to 15.1X53-D592 on EX2300/EX3400; 16.1 versions prior to 16.1R7-S7; 17.1 versions prior to 17.1R2-S12, 17.1R3; 17.2 versions prior to 17.2R2-S7, 17.2R3; 17.2X75 versions prior to 17.2X75-D102, 17.2X75-D110, 17.2X75-D44; 17.3 versions prior to 17.3R2-S5, 17.3R3-S5; 17.4 versions prior to 17.4R1-S8, 17.4R2; 18.1 versions prior to 18.1R2-S4, 18.1R3; 18.2X75 versions prior to 18.2X75-D20. | ||||
| CVE-2020-1609 | 1 Juniper | 1 Junos | 2024-11-21 | 8.8 High |
| When a device using Juniper Network's Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol Daemon (JDHCPD) process on Junos OS or Junos OS Evolved which is configured in relay mode it vulnerable to an attacker sending crafted IPv6 packets who may then arbitrarily execute commands as root on the target device. This issue affects IPv6 JDHCPD services. This issue affects: Juniper Networks Junos OS: 15.1 versions prior to 15.1R7-S6; 15.1X49 versions prior to 15.1X49-D200; 15.1X53 versions prior to 15.1X53-D592; 16.1 versions prior to 16.1R7-S6; 16.2 versions prior to 16.2R2-S11; 17.1 versions prior to 17.1R2-S11, 17.1R3-S1; 17.2 versions prior to 17.2R2-S8, 17.2R3-S3; 17.3 versions prior to 17.3R3-S6; 17.4 versions prior to 17.4R2-S7, 17.4R3; 18.1 versions prior to 18.1R3-S8; 18.2 versions prior to 18.2R3-S2; 18.2X75 versions prior to 18.2X75-D60; 18.3 versions prior to 18.3R1-S6, 18.3R2-S2, 18.3R3; 18.4 versions prior to 18.4R1-S5, 18.4R2-S3, 18.4R3; 19.1 versions prior to 19.1R1-S3, 19.1R2; 19.2 versions prior to 19.2R1-S3, 19.2R2*. and All versions prior to 19.3R1 on Junos OS Evolved. This issue do not affect versions of Junos OS prior to 15.1, or JDHCPD operating as a local server in non-relay mode. | ||||
| CVE-2020-1607 | 1 Juniper | 44 Ex2300, Ex2300-c, Ex3400 and 41 more | 2024-11-21 | 7.5 High |
| Insufficient Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) protection in J-Web may potentially allow a remote attacker to inject web script or HTML, hijack the target user's J-Web session and perform administrative actions on the Junos device as the targeted user. This issue affects Juniper Networks Junos OS 12.3 versions prior to 12.3R12-S15; 12.3X48 versions prior to 12.3X48-D86, 12.3X48-D90 on SRX Series; 14.1X53 versions prior to 14.1X53-D51 on EX and QFX Series; 15.1F6 versions prior to 15.1F6-S13; 15.1 versions prior to 15.1R7-S5; 15.1X49 versions prior to 15.1X49-D181, 15.1X49-D190 on SRX Series; 15.1X53 versions prior to 15.1X53-D238 on QFX5200/QFX5110 Series; 15.1X53 versions prior to 15.1X53-D592 on EX2300/EX3400 Series; 16.1 versions prior to 16.1R4-S13, 16.1R7-S5; 16.2 versions prior to 16.2R2-S10; 17.1 versions prior to 17.1R2-S11, 17.1R3-S1; 17.2 versions prior to 17.2R1-S9, 17.2R3-S2; 17.3 versions prior to 17.3R2-S5, 17.3R3-S5; 17.4 versions prior to 17.4R2-S6, 17.4R3; 18.1 versions prior to 18.1R3-S7; 18.2 versions prior to 18.2R2-S5, 18.2R3; 18.3 versions prior to 18.3R1-S6, 18.3R2-S1, 18.3R3; 18.4 versions prior to 18.4R1-S5, 18.4R2; 19.1 versions prior to 19.1R1-S2, 19.1R2. | ||||
| CVE-2020-1605 | 1 Juniper | 1 Junos | 2024-11-21 | 8.8 High |
| When a device using Juniper Network's Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol Daemon (JDHCPD) process on Junos OS or Junos OS Evolved which is configured in relay mode it vulnerable to an attacker sending crafted IPv4 packets who may then arbitrarily execute commands as root on the target device. This issue affects IPv4 JDHCPD services. This issue affects: Juniper Networks Junos OS: 15.1 versions prior to 15.1R7-S6; 15.1X49 versions prior to 15.1X49-D200; 15.1X53 versions prior to 15.1X53-D592; 16.1 versions prior to 16.1R7-S6; 16.2 versions prior to 16.2R2-S11; 17.1 versions prior to 17.1R2-S11, 17.1R3-S1; 17.2 versions prior to 17.2R2-S8, 17.2R3-S3; 17.3 versions prior to 17.3R3-S6; 17.4 versions prior to 17.4R2-S7, 17.4R3; 18.1 versions prior to 18.1R3-S8; 18.2 versions prior to 18.2R3-S2; 18.2X75 versions prior to 18.2X75-D60; 18.3 versions prior to 18.3R1-S6, 18.3R2-S2, 18.3R3; 18.4 versions prior to 18.4R1-S5, 18.4R2-S3, 18.4R3; 19.1 versions prior to 19.1R1-S3, 19.1R2; 19.2 versions prior to 19.2R1-S3, 19.2R2*. and All versions prior to 19.3R1 on Junos OS Evolved. This issue do not affect versions of Junos OS prior to 15.1, or JDHCPD operating as a local server in non-relay mode. | ||||
| CVE-2020-1603 | 1 Juniper | 1 Junos | 2024-11-21 | 8.6 High |
| Specific IPv6 packets sent by clients processed by the Routing Engine (RE) are improperly handled. These IPv6 packets are designed to be blocked by the RE from egressing the RE. Instead, the RE allows these specific IPv6 packets to egress the RE, at which point a mbuf memory leak occurs within the Juniper Networks Junos OS device. This memory leak eventually leads to a kernel crash (vmcore), or the device hanging and requiring a power cycle to restore service, creating a Denial of Service (DoS) condition. During the time where mbufs are rising, yet not fully filled, some traffic from client devices may begin to be black holed. To be black holed, this traffic must match the condition where this traffic must be processed by the RE. Continued receipt and attempted egress of these specific IPv6 packets from the Routing Engine (RE) will create an extended Denial of Service (DoS) condition. Scenarios which have been observed are: 1. In a single chassis, single RE scenario, the device will hang without vmcore, or a vmcore may occur and then hang. In this scenario the device needs to be power cycled. 2. In a single chassis, dual RE scenario, the device master RE will fail over to the backup RE. In this scenario, the master and the backup REs need to be reset from time to time when they vmcore. There is no need to power cycle the device. 3. In a dual chassis, single RE scenario, the device will hang without vmcore, or a vmcore may occur and then hang. In this scenario, the two chassis' design relies upon some type of network level redundancy - VRRP, GRES, NSR, etc. - 3.a In a commanded switchover, where nonstop active routing (NSR) is enabled no session loss is observed. 4. In a dual chassis, dual chassis scenario, rely upon the RE to RE failover as stated in the second scenario. In the unlikely event that the device does not switch RE to RE gracefully, then the fallback position is to the network level services scenario in the third scenario. This issue affects: Juniper Networks Junos OS 16.1 versions prior to 16.1R7-S6; 16.1 version 16.1X70-D10 and later; 16.2 versions prior to 16.2R2-S11; 17.1 versions prior to 17.1R2-S11, 17.1R3-S1; 17.2 versions prior to 17.2R1-S9, 17.2R2-S8, 17.2R3-S3; 17.3 versions prior to 17.3R3-S6; 17.4 versions prior to 17.4R2-S9, 17.4R3; 18.1 versions prior to 18.1R3-S7; 18.2 versions prior to 18.2R3-S2; 18.2X75 versions prior to 18.2X75-D50, 18.2X75-D410; 18.3 versions prior to 18.3R1-S6, 18.3R2-S2, 18.3R3; 18.4 versions prior to 18.4R1-S6, 18.4R2-S2, 18.4R3; 19.1 versions prior to 19.1R1-S3, 19.1R2; 19.2 versions prior to 19.2R1-S2, 19.2R2. This issue does not affect releases prior to Junos OS 16.1R1. | ||||
| CVE-2020-1602 | 1 Juniper | 1 Junos | 2024-11-21 | 7.1 High |
| When a device using Juniper Network's Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol Daemon (JDHCPD) process on Junos OS or Junos OS Evolved which is configured in relay mode it vulnerable to an attacker sending crafted IPv4 packets who may remotely take over the code execution of the JDHDCP process. This issue affect IPv4 JDHCPD services. This issue affects: Juniper Networks Junos OS: 15.1 versions prior to 15.1R7-S6; 15.1X49 versions prior to 15.1X49-D200; 15.1X53 versions prior to 15.1X53-D592; 16.1 versions prior to 16.1R7-S6; 16.2 versions prior to 16.2R2-S11; 17.1 versions prior to 17.1R2-S11, 17.1R3-S1; 17.2 versions prior to 17.2R2-S8, 17.2R3-S3; 17.3 versions prior to 17.3R3-S6; 17.4 versions prior to 17.4R2-S7, 17.4R3; 18.1 versions prior to 18.1R3-S8; 18.2 versions prior to 18.2R3-S2; 18.2X75 versions prior to 18.2X75-D60; 18.3 versions prior to 18.3R1-S6, 18.3R2-S2, 18.3R3; 18.4 versions prior to 18.4R1-S5, 18.4R2-S3, 18.4R3; 19.1 versions prior to 19.1R1-S3, 19.1R2; 19.2 versions prior to 19.2R1-S3, 19.2R2*. and All versions prior to 19.3R1 on Junos OS Evolved. This issue do not affect versions of Junos OS prior to 15.1, or JDHCPD operating as a local server in non-relay mode. | ||||
| CVE-2020-1457 | 1 Microsoft | 1 Windows 10 | 2024-11-21 | 7.8 High |
| A remote code execution vulnerability exists in the way that Microsoft Windows Codecs Library handles objects in memory, aka 'Microsoft Windows Codecs Library Remote Code Execution Vulnerability'. This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2020-1425. | ||||
| CVE-2020-1442 | 1 Microsoft | 2 Office Online Server, Office Web Apps | 2024-11-21 | 6.1 Medium |
| A spoofing vulnerability exists when an Office Web Apps server does not properly sanitize a specially crafted request, aka 'Office Web Apps XSS Vulnerability'. | ||||
| CVE-2020-1436 | 1 Microsoft | 8 Windows 10, Windows 7, Windows 8.1 and 5 more | 2024-11-21 | 8.8 High |
| A remote code execution vulnerability exists when the Windows font library improperly handles specially crafted fonts.For all systems except Windows 10, an attacker who successfully exploited the vulnerability could execute code remotely, aka 'Windows Font Library Remote Code Execution Vulnerability'. | ||||
| CVE-2020-1355 | 1 Microsoft | 2 Windows 10, Windows Server 2016 | 2024-11-21 | 7.8 High |
| A remote code execution vulnerability exists when the Windows Font Driver Host improperly handles memory.An attacker who successfully exploited the vulnerability would gain execution on a victim system.The security update addresses the vulnerability by correcting how the Windows Font Driver Host handles memory., aka 'Windows Font Driver Host Remote Code Execution Vulnerability'. | ||||
| CVE-2020-1340 | 1 Microsoft | 1 Nugetgallery | 2024-11-21 | 5.4 Medium |
| A spoofing vulnerability exists when the NuGetGallery does not properly sanitize input on package metadata values, aka 'NuGetGallery Spoofing Vulnerability'. | ||||
| CVE-2020-1327 | 1 Microsoft | 1 Azure Devops Server | 2024-11-21 | 6.1 Medium |
| A spoofing vulnerability exists in Microsoft Azure DevOps Server when it fails to properly handle web requests, aka 'Azure DevOps Server HTML Injection Vulnerability'. | ||||
| CVE-2020-1326 | 1 Microsoft | 1 Azure Devops Server | 2024-11-21 | 5.4 Medium |
| A Cross-site Scripting (XSS) vulnerability exists when Azure DevOps Server does not properly sanitize user provided input, aka 'Azure DevOps Server Cross-site Scripting Vulnerability'. | ||||
| CVE-2020-1289 | 1 Microsoft | 1 Sharepoint Foundation | 2024-11-21 | 5.4 Medium |
| A spoofing vulnerability exists when Microsoft SharePoint Server does not properly sanitize a specially crafted web request to an affected SharePoint server, aka 'Microsoft SharePoint Spoofing Vulnerability'. This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2020-1148. | ||||
| CVE-2020-1281 | 1 Microsoft | 8 Windows 10, Windows 7, Windows 8.1 and 5 more | 2024-11-21 | 8.8 High |
| A remote code execution vulnerability exists when Microsoft Windows OLE fails to properly validate user input, aka 'Windows OLE Remote Code Execution Vulnerability'. | ||||
| CVE-2020-1260 | 1 Microsoft | 9 Internet Explorer, Windows 10, Windows 7 and 6 more | 2024-11-21 | 7.5 High |
| A remote code execution vulnerability exists in the way that the VBScript engine handles objects in memory, aka 'VBScript Remote Code Execution Vulnerability'. This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2020-1213, CVE-2020-1214, CVE-2020-1215, CVE-2020-1216, CVE-2020-1230. | ||||
| CVE-2020-1239 | 1 Microsoft | 8 Windows 10, Windows 7, Windows 8.1 and 5 more | 2024-11-21 | 8.8 High |
| A memory corruption vulnerability exists when Windows Media Foundation improperly handles objects in memory, aka 'Media Foundation Memory Corruption Vulnerability'. This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2020-1238. | ||||
| CVE-2020-1238 | 1 Microsoft | 3 Windows 10, Windows Server 2016, Windows Server 2019 | 2024-11-21 | 8.8 High |
| A memory corruption vulnerability exists when Windows Media Foundation improperly handles objects in memory, aka 'Media Foundation Memory Corruption Vulnerability'. This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2020-1239. | ||||
| CVE-2020-1213 | 1 Microsoft | 9 Internet Explorer, Windows 10, Windows 7 and 6 more | 2024-11-21 | 7.5 High |
| A remote code execution vulnerability exists in the way that the VBScript engine handles objects in memory, aka 'VBScript Remote Code Execution Vulnerability'. This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2020-1214, CVE-2020-1215, CVE-2020-1216, CVE-2020-1230, CVE-2020-1260. | ||||