| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| GitLab has remediated an issue in GitLab CE/EE affecting all versions from 8.14 before 18.7.6, 18.8 before 18.8.6, and 18.9 before 18.9.2 that could have allowed an authenticated user to gain unauthorized access to confidential issue title created in public projects under certain circumstances. |
| An improper certificate validation vulnerability has been reported to affect Video Station. If an attacker gains local network access who have also gained an administrator account, they can then exploit the vulnerability to compromise the security of the system.
We have already fixed the vulnerability in the following version:
Video Station 5.8.2 and later |
| An SQL injection vulnerability has been reported to affect Video Station. If an attacker gains local network access who have also gained an administrator account, they can then exploit the vulnerability to execute unauthorized code or commands.
We have already fixed the vulnerability in the following version:
Video Station 5.8.2 and later |
| Emails sent by pretix can utilize placeholders that will be filled with customer data. For example, when {name}
is used in an email template, it will be replaced with the buyer's
name for the final email. This mechanism contained two security-relevant
bugs:
*
It was possible to exfiltrate information about the pretix system through specially crafted placeholder names such as {{event.__init__.__code__.co_filename}}.
This way, an attacker with the ability to control email templates
(usually every user of the pretix backend) could retrieve sensitive
information from the system configuration, including even database
passwords or API keys. pretix does include mechanisms to prevent the usage of such
malicious placeholders, however due to a mistake in the code, they were
not fully effective for the email subject.
*
Placeholders in subjects and plain text bodies of emails were
wrongfully evaluated twice. Therefore, if the first evaluation of a
placeholder again contains a placeholder, this second placeholder was
rendered. This allows the rendering of placeholders controlled by the
ticket buyer, and therefore the exploitation of the first issue as a
ticket buyer. Luckily, the only buyer-controlled placeholder available
in pretix by default (that is not validated in a way that prevents the
issue) is {invoice_company}, which is very unusual (but not
impossible) to be contained in an email subject template. In addition
to broadening the attack surface of the first issue, this could
theoretically also leak information about an order to one of the
attendees within that order. However, we also consider this scenario
very unlikely under typical conditions.
Out of caution, we recommend that you rotate all passwords and API keys contained in your pretix.cfg https://docs.pretix.eu/self-hosting/config/ file. |
| Emails sent by pretix can utilize placeholders that will be filled with customer data. For example, when {name}
is used in an email template, it will be replaced with the buyer's
name for the final email. This mechanism contained a security-relevant bug:
It was possible to exfiltrate information about the pretix system through specially crafted placeholder names such as {{event.__init__.__code__.co_filename}}.
This way, an attacker with the ability to control email templates
(usually every user of the pretix backend) could retrieve sensitive
information from the system configuration, including even database
passwords or API keys. pretix does include mechanisms to prevent the usage of such
malicious placeholders, however due to a mistake in the code, they were
not fully effective for this plugin.
Out of caution, we recommend that you rotate all passwords and API keys contained in your pretix.cfg file. |
| GitLab has remediated an issue in GitLab CE/EE affecting all versions from 10.6 before 18.7.6, 18.8 before 18.8.6, and 18.9 before 18.9.2 that could have allowed an authenticated user, when the `markdown_placeholders` feature flag was enabled, to inject JavaScript in a browser due to improper sanitization of placeholder content in markdown processing. |
| GitLab has remediated an issue in GitLab CE/EE affecting all versions from 18.9 before 18.9.2 that could have allowed an unauthenticated user to cause a denial of service by sending specially crafted GraphQL requests due to uncontrolled recursion under certain circumstances. |
| GitLab has remediated an issue in GitLab CE/EE affecting all versions from 16.11 before 18.7.6, 18.8 before 18.8.6, and 18.9 before 18.9.2 that could have allowed an unauthenticated user to cause a denial of service condition due to improper input validation when processing specially crafted JSON payloads in the protected branches API. |
| GitLab has remediated an issue in GitLab CE/EE affecting all versions from 10.0 before 18.7.6, 18.8 before 18.8.6, and 18.9 before 18.9.2 that could have allowed an unauthenticated user to cause a denial of service by issuing specially crafted requests to repository archive endpoints under certain conditions. |
| GitLab has remediated an issue in GitLab CE/EE affecting all versions from 16.11 before 18.7.6, 18.8 before 18.8.6, and 18.9 before 18.9.2 that could have allowed an authenticated user to cause a denial of service condition due to improper input validation on webhook custom header names under certain conditions. |
| Improper input validation in the UEFI firmware for some Intel Reference Platforms may allow an escalation of privilege. System software adversary with a privileged user combined with a high complexity attack may enable data manipulation. This result may potentially occur via local access when attack requirements are present without special internal knowledge and requires active user interaction. The potential vulnerability may impact the confidentiality (none), integrity (high) and availability (high) of the vulnerable system, resulting in subsequent system confidentiality (none), integrity (high) and availability (high) impacts. |
| Improper buffer restrictions in some UEFI firmware for some Intel(R) reference platforms may allow an escalation of privilege. System software adversary with a privileged user combined with a high complexity attack may enable data manipulation. This result may potentially occur via local access when attack requirements are not present without special internal knowledge and requires no user interaction. The potential vulnerability may impact the confidentiality (none), integrity (high) and availability (low) of the vulnerable system, resulting in subsequent system confidentiality (none), integrity (none) and availability (none) impacts. |
| Improper input validation in the UEFI WheaERST module for some Intel(R) reference platforms may allow an escalation of privilege. System software adversary with a privileged user combined with a high complexity attack may enable escalation of privilege. This result may potentially occur via local access when attack requirements are present without special internal knowledge and requires no user interaction. The potential vulnerability may impact the confidentiality (high), integrity (high) and availability (high) of the vulnerable system, resulting in subsequent system confidentiality (none), integrity (none) and availability (none) impacts. |
| Time-of-check time-of-use race condition in the WheaERST SMM module for some Intel(R) reference platforms may allow an escalation of privilege. System software adversary with a privileged user combined with a high complexity attack may enable escalation of privilege. This result may potentially occur via local access when attack requirements are present without special internal knowledge and requires no user interaction. The potential vulnerability may impact the confidentiality (high), integrity (high) and availability (high) of the vulnerable system, resulting in subsequent system confidentiality (none), integrity (none) and availability (none) impacts. |
| Improper input validation in the UEFI FlashUcAcmSmm module for some Intel(R) reference platforms may allow an escalation of privilege. System software adversary with a privileged user combined with a high complexity attack may enable local code execution. This result may potentially occur via local access when attack requirements are not present without special internal knowledge and requires no user interaction. The potential vulnerability may impact the confidentiality (high), integrity (high) and availability (high) of the vulnerable system, resulting in subsequent system confidentiality (high), integrity (high) and availability (high) impacts. |
| Improper input validation in the UEFI ImcErrorHandler module for some Intel(R) reference platforms may allow an escalation of privilege. System software adversary with a privileged user combined with a high complexity attack may enable escalation of privilege. This result may potentially occur via local access when attack requirements are present without special internal knowledge and requires no user interaction. The potential vulnerability may impact the confidentiality (high), integrity (high) and availability (high) of the vulnerable system, resulting in subsequent system confidentiality (none), integrity (none) and availability (none) impacts. |
| Improper buffer restrictions in the UEFI DXE module for some Intel(R) Reference Platforms within UEFI may allow an information disclosure. System software adversary with a privileged user combined with a high complexity attack may enable data exposure. This result may potentially occur via local access when attack requirements are not present without special internal knowledge and requires no user interaction. The potential vulnerability may impact the confidentiality (low), integrity (none) and availability (none) of the vulnerable system, resulting in subsequent system confidentiality (none), integrity (none) and availability (none) impacts. |
| Improper input validation in some UEFI firmware SMM module for the Intel(R) reference platforms may allow an escalation of privilege. System software adversary with a privileged user combined with a low complexity attack may enable local code execution. This result may potentially occur via local access when attack requirements are present without special internal knowledge and requires no user interaction. The potential vulnerability may impact the confidentiality (high), integrity (high) and availability (high) of the vulnerable system, resulting in subsequent system confidentiality (high), integrity (high) and availability (high) impacts. |
| Exposure of resource to wrong sphere in the UEFI PdaSmm module for some Intel(R) reference platforms may allow an information disclosure. System software adversary with a privileged user combined with a high complexity attack may enable data exposure. This result may potentially occur via local access when attack requirements are not present without special internal knowledge and requires no user interaction. The potential vulnerability may impact the confidentiality (high), integrity (none) and availability (none) of the vulnerable system, resulting in subsequent system confidentiality (none), integrity (none) and availability (none) impacts. |
| Time-of-check time-of-use race condition in the UEFI PdaSmm module for some Intel(R) reference platforms may allow an information disclosure. System software adversary with a privileged user combined with a high complexity attack may enable data exposure. This result may potentially occur via local access when attack requirements are not present without special internal knowledge and requires no user interaction. The potential vulnerability may impact the confidentiality (high), integrity (none) and availability (none) of the vulnerable system, resulting in subsequent system confidentiality (none), integrity (none) and availability (none) impacts. |
