| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| A vulnerability has been identified in SIPROTEC 5 6MD84 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 6MD85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 6MD85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 6MD86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 6MD86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 6MD89 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 6MU85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7KE85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7KE85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7SA82 (CP100) (All versions < V8.90), SIPROTEC 5 7SA82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SA84 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SA86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SA86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SA87 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SA87 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SD82 (CP100) (All versions < V8.90), SIPROTEC 5 7SD82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SD84 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SD86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SD86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SD87 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SD87 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ81 (CP100) (All versions < V8.89), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ81 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ82 (CP100) (All versions < V8.89), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SK82 (CP100) (All versions < V8.89), SIPROTEC 5 7SK82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SK85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SK85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SL82 (CP100) (All versions < V8.90), SIPROTEC 5 7SL82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SL86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SL86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SL87 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SL87 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SS85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SS85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7ST85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7ST85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7ST86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7SX82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SX85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7UM85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7UT82 (CP100) (All versions < V8.90), SIPROTEC 5 7UT82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7UT85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7UT85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7UT86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7UT86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7UT87 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7UT87 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7VE85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7VK87 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7VK87 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7VU85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BA-2EL (Rev.1) (All versions < V9.62 installed on CP150 and CP300 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BA-2EL (Rev.1) (All versions installed on CP200 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BA-2EL (Rev.1) (All versions < V8.89 installed on CP100 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BB-2FO (Rev. 1) (All versions installed on CP200 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BB-2FO (Rev. 1) (All versions < V9.62 installed on CP150 and CP300 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BB-2FO (Rev. 1) (All versions < V8.89 installed on CP100 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BD-2FO (All versions < V9.62), SIPROTEC 5 Compact 7SX800 (CP050) (All versions < V9.64). The affected devices are supporting weak ciphers on several ports (443/tcp for web, 4443/tcp for DIGSI 5 and configurable port for syslog over TLS).
This could allow an unauthorized attacker in a man-in-the-middle position to decrypt any data passed over to and from those ports. |
| CGGMP24 is a state-of-art ECDSA TSS protocol that supports 1-round signing (requires 3 preprocessing rounds), identifiable abort, and a key refresh protocol. In versions 0.6.3 and prior of cggmp21 and version 0.7.0-alpha.1 of cggmp24, presignatures can be used in the way that significantly reduces security. cggmp24 version 0.7.0-alpha.2 release contains API changes that make it impossible to use presignatures in contexts in which it reduces security. |
| A static initialization vector (IV) in the encrypt function of netbird management's service from v0.23.2 to v0.29.1 allows attackers to obtain sensitive information (email addresses) when in possession of the audit events database. |
| Inside Track / Entropy Derby is a research-grade horse-racing betting engine. Prior to commit 2d38d2f, the VDF-based timelock encryption system fails to enforce sequential delay against the betting operator. Bettors pre-compute the entire Wesolowski VDF and include vdfOutputHex in their encrypted bet ticket, allowing the house to decrypt immediately using fast proof verification instead of expensive VDF evaluation. This issue has been patched via commit 2d38d2f. |
| Due to Nonce reuse, attackers can perform reply attack or decrypt captured packets. |
| Use of Hard-coded Cryptographic Key vulnerability in ABB RMC-100, ABB RMC-100 LITE.
An attacker can gain access to salted information to decrypt MQTT information.
This issue affects RMC-100: from 2105457-043 through 2105457-045; RMC-100 LITE: from 2106229-015 through 2106229-016. |
| desknet's NEO V4.0R1.0 to V9.0R2.0 contains a hard-coded cryptographic key, which allows an attacker to create malicious AppSuite applications. |
| ZF FROST is a Rust implementation of FROST (Flexible Round-Optimised Schnorr Threshold signatures). In versions 2.0.0 through 2.1.0, refresh shares with smaller min_signers will reduce security of group. The inability to change min_signers (i.e. the threshold) with the refresh share functionality (frost_core::keys::refresh module) was not made clear to users. Using a smaller value would not decrease the threshold, and attempts to sign using a smaller threshold would fail. Additionally, after refreshing the shares with a smaller threshold, it would still be possible to sign with the original threshold, potentially causing a security loss to the participant's shares. This issue is fixed in version 2.2.0. |
| Smadar SPS – CWE-327: Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm |
| Weak server key used for TLS encryption. The following products are affected: Acronis Cyber Protect 16 (Linux, macOS, Windows) before build 39938. |
| The JWT secret key is embedded in the egOS WebGUI backend and is readable to the default user. An unauthenticated remote attacker can generate valid HS256 tokens and bypass authentication/authorization due to the use of hard-coded cryptographic key. |
| The devices are vulnerable to an authentication bypass due to flaws in the authorization mechanism. An unauthenticated remote attacker could exploit this weakness by performing brute-force attacks to guess valid credentials or by using MD5 collision techniques to forge authentication hashes, potentially compromising the device. |
| A vulnerability in the cryptographic logic used by HPE Aruba Networking EdgeConnect SD-WAN Gateways could allow an authenticated remote attacker to gain shell access. Successful exploitation could allow an attacker to execute arbitrary commands on the underlying operating system, potentially leading to unauthorized access and control over the affected systems. |
| An issue in the index.js decryptCookie function of cookie-encrypter v1.0.1 allows attackers to execute a bit flipping attack. |
| ESPTouch is a connection protocol for internet of things devices. In the ESPTouchV2 protocol, while there is an option to use a custom AES key, there is no option to set the IV (Initialization Vector) prior to versions 5.3.2, 5.2.4, 5.1.6, and 5.0.8. The IV is set to zero and remains constant throughout the product's lifetime. In AES/CBC mode, if the IV is not properly initialized, the encrypted output becomes deterministic, leading to potential data leakage. To address the aforementioned issues, the application generates a random IV when activating the AES key starting in versions 5.3.2, 5.2.4, 5.1.6, and 5.0.8. This IV is then transmitted along with the provision data to the provision device. The provision device has also been equipped with a parser for the AES IV. The upgrade is applicable for all applications and users of ESPTouch v2 component from ESP-IDF. As it is implemented in the ESP Wi-Fi stack, there is no workaround for the user to fix the application layer without upgrading the underlying firmware. |
| A vulnerability has been identified in APOGEE PXC Series (BACnet) (All versions), APOGEE PXC Series (P2 Ethernet) (All versions), TALON TC Series (BACnet) (All versions). Affected devices contain a weak encryption mechanism based on a hard-coded key.
This could allow an attacker to guess or decrypt the password from the cyphertext. |
| Web installer integrity check used weak hash algorithm. The following products are affected: Acronis Cyber Protect 16 (Windows) before build 39169. |
| itech iLabClient 3.7.1 relies on the hard-coded YngAYdgAE/kKZYu2F2wm6w== key (found in iLabClient.jar) for local users to read or write to the database. |
| free-one-api allows users to access large language model reverse engineering libraries through the standard OpenAI API format. In versions up to and including 1.0.1, MD5 is used to hash passwords before sending them to the backend. MD5 is a cryptographically broken hashing algorithm and is no longer considered secure for password storage or transmission. It is vulnerable to collision attacks and can be easily cracked using modern hardware, exposing user credentials to potential compromise. As of time of publication, a replacement for MD5 has not been committed to the free-one-api GitHub repository. |
| gitoxide is an implementation of git written in Rust. Before 0.42.0, gitoxide uses SHA-1 hash implementations without any collision detection, leaving it vulnerable to hash collision attacks. gitoxide uses the sha1_smol or sha1 crate, both of which implement standard SHA-1 without any mitigations for collision attacks. This means that two distinct Git objects with colliding SHA-1 hashes would break the Git object model and integrity checks when used with gitoxide. This vulnerability is fixed in 0.42.0. |
