Filtered by vendor Redhat
Subscriptions
Filtered by product Openshift
Subscriptions
Total
1104 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2012-5622 | 1 Redhat | 1 Openshift | 2025-04-11 | N/A |
| Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the management console (openshift-console/app/controllers/application_controller.rb) in OpenShift 0.0.5 allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of arbitrary users via unspecified vectors. | ||||
| CVE-2013-0263 | 3 Rack Project, Redhat, Rhel Sam | 3 Rack, Openshift, 1.2 | 2025-04-11 | N/A |
| Rack::Session::Cookie in Rack 1.5.x before 1.5.2, 1.4.x before 1.4.5, 1.3.x before 1.3.10, 1.2.x before 1.2.8, and 1.1.x before 1.1.6 allows remote attackers to guess the session cookie, gain privileges, and execute arbitrary code via a timing attack involving an HMAC comparison function that does not run in constant time. | ||||
| CVE-2013-0253 | 2 Apache, Redhat | 3 Maven, Maven Wagon, Openshift | 2025-04-11 | N/A |
| The default configuration of Apache Maven 3.0.4, when using Maven Wagon 2.1, disables SSL certificate checks, which allows remote attackers to spoof servers via a man-in-the-middle (MITM) attack. | ||||
| CVE-2012-5371 | 2 Redhat, Ruby-lang | 2 Openshift, Ruby | 2025-04-11 | N/A |
| Ruby (aka CRuby) 1.9 before 1.9.3-p327 and 2.0 before r37575 computes hash values without properly restricting the ability to trigger hash collisions predictably, which allows context-dependent attackers to cause a denial of service (CPU consumption) via crafted input to an application that maintains a hash table, as demonstrated by a universal multicollision attack against a variant of the MurmurHash2 algorithm, a different vulnerability than CVE-2011-4815. | ||||
| CVE-2013-0169 | 4 Openssl, Oracle, Polarssl and 1 more | 11 Openssl, Openjdk, Polarssl and 8 more | 2025-04-11 | N/A |
| The TLS protocol 1.1 and 1.2 and the DTLS protocol 1.0 and 1.2, as used in OpenSSL, OpenJDK, PolarSSL, and other products, do not properly consider timing side-channel attacks on a MAC check requirement during the processing of malformed CBC padding, which allows remote attackers to conduct distinguishing attacks and plaintext-recovery attacks via statistical analysis of timing data for crafted packets, aka the "Lucky Thirteen" issue. | ||||
| CVE-2013-0155 | 5 Cloudforms Cloudengine, Debian, Redhat and 2 more | 6 1, Debian Linux, Openshift and 3 more | 2025-04-11 | N/A |
| Ruby on Rails 3.0.x before 3.0.19, 3.1.x before 3.1.10, and 3.2.x before 3.2.11 does not properly consider differences in parameter handling between the Active Record component and the JSON implementation, which allows remote attackers to bypass intended database-query restrictions and perform NULL checks or trigger missing WHERE clauses via a crafted request, as demonstrated by certain "[nil]" values, a related issue to CVE-2012-2660 and CVE-2012-2694. | ||||
| CVE-2012-4522 | 2 Redhat, Ruby-lang | 3 Enterprise Linux, Openshift, Ruby | 2025-04-11 | N/A |
| The rb_get_path_check function in file.c in Ruby 1.9.3 before patchlevel 286 and Ruby 2.0.0 before r37163 allows context-dependent attackers to create files in unexpected locations or with unexpected names via a NUL byte in a file path. | ||||
| CVE-2013-0333 | 4 Cloudforms Cloudengine, Redhat, Rhel Sam and 1 more | 5 1, Openshift, 1.1 and 2 more | 2025-04-11 | N/A |
| lib/active_support/json/backends/yaml.rb in Ruby on Rails 2.3.x before 2.3.16 and 3.0.x before 3.0.20 does not properly convert JSON data to YAML data for processing by a YAML parser, which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code, conduct SQL injection attacks, or bypass authentication via crafted data that triggers unsafe decoding, a different vulnerability than CVE-2013-0156. | ||||
| CVE-2012-3465 | 4 Cloudforms Cloudengine, Redhat, Rhel Sam and 1 more | 5 1, Openshift, 1.1 and 2 more | 2025-04-11 | N/A |
| Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in actionpack/lib/action_view/helpers/sanitize_helper.rb in the strip_tags helper in Ruby on Rails before 3.0.17, 3.1.x before 3.1.8, and 3.2.x before 3.2.8 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via malformed HTML markup. | ||||
| CVE-2022-43844 | 2 Ibm, Redhat | 2 Robotic Process Automation For Cloud Pak, Openshift | 2025-04-10 | 8.8 High |
| IBM Robotic Process Automation for Cloud Pak 20.12 through 21.0.3 is vulnerable to broken access control. A user is not correctly redirected to the platform log out screen when logging out of IBM RPA for Cloud Pak. IBM X-Force ID: 239081. | ||||
| CVE-2022-41740 | 3 Ibm, Microsoft, Redhat | 4 Robotic Process Automation, Robotic Process Automation For Cloud Pak, Windows and 1 more | 2025-04-10 | 4.6 Medium |
| IBM Robotic Process Automation 20.12 through 21.0.6 could allow an attacker with physical access to the system to obtain highly sensitive information from system memory. IBM X-Force ID: 238053. | ||||
| CVE-2025-30204 | 1 Redhat | 19 Acm, Advanced Cluster Security, Cryostat and 16 more | 2025-04-10 | 7.5 High |
| golang-jwt is a Go implementation of JSON Web Tokens. Starting in version 3.2.0 and prior to versions 5.2.2 and 4.5.2, the function parse.ParseUnverified splits (via a call to strings.Split) its argument (which is untrusted data) on periods. As a result, in the face of a malicious request whose Authorization header consists of Bearer followed by many period characters, a call to that function incurs allocations to the tune of O(n) bytes (where n stands for the length of the function's argument), with a constant factor of about 16. This issue is fixed in 5.2.2 and 4.5.2. | ||||
| CVE-2022-43573 | 3 Ibm, Microsoft, Redhat | 5 Robotic Process Automation, Robotic Process Automation As A Service, Robotic Process Automation For Cloud Pak and 2 more | 2025-04-09 | 3.1 Low |
| IBM Robotic Process Automation 20.12 through 21.0.6 is vulnerable to exposure of the name and email for the creator/modifier of platform level objects. IBM X-Force ID: 238678. | ||||
| CVE-2023-0296 | 1 Redhat | 1 Openshift | 2025-04-04 | 5.3 Medium |
| The Birthday attack against 64-bit block ciphers flaw (CVE-2016-2183) was reported for the health checks port (9979) on etcd grpc-proxy component. Even though the CVE-2016-2183 has been fixed in the etcd components, to enable periodic health checks from kubelet, it was necessary to open up a new port (9979) on etcd grpc-proxy, hence this port might be considered as still vulnerable to the same type of vulnerability. The health checks on etcd grpc-proxy do not contain sensitive data (only metrics data), therefore the potential impact related to this vulnerability is minimal. The CVE-2023-0296 has been assigned to this issue to track the permanent fix in the etcd component. | ||||
| CVE-2022-41721 | 2 Golang, Redhat | 5 H2c, Acm, Migration Toolkit Applications and 2 more | 2025-04-04 | 7.5 High |
| A request smuggling attack is possible when using MaxBytesHandler. When using MaxBytesHandler, the body of an HTTP request is not fully consumed. When the server attempts to read HTTP2 frames from the connection, it will instead be reading the body of the HTTP request, which could be attacker-manipulated to represent arbitrary HTTP2 requests. | ||||
| CVE-2023-22863 | 3 Ibm, Microsoft, Redhat | 5 Robotic Process Automation, Robotic Process Automation As A Service, Robotic Process Automation For Cloud Pak and 2 more | 2025-04-03 | 5.9 Medium |
| IBM Robotic Process Automation 20.12.0 through 21.0.2 defaults to HTTP in some RPA commands when the prefix is not explicitly specified in the URL. This could allow an attacker to obtain sensitive information using man in the middle techniques. IBM X-Force ID: 244109. | ||||
| CVE-2023-22594 | 3 Ibm, Microsoft, Redhat | 5 Robotic Process Automation, Robotic Process Automation As A Service, Robotic Process Automation For Cloud Pak and 2 more | 2025-04-03 | 4.6 Medium |
| IBM Robotic Process Automation for Cloud Pak 20.12.0 through 21.0.4 is vulnerable to cross-site scripting. This vulnerability allows users to embed arbitrary JavaScript code in the Web UI thus altering the intended functionality potentially leading to credentials disclosure within a trusted session. IBM X-Force ID: 244075. | ||||
| CVE-2023-22592 | 2 Ibm, Redhat | 2 Robotic Process Automation For Cloud Pak, Openshift | 2025-04-03 | 4 Medium |
| IBM Robotic Process Automation for Cloud Pak 21.0.1 through 21.0.4 could allow a local user to perform unauthorized actions due to insufficient permission settings. IBM X-Force ID: 244073. | ||||
| CVE-2023-24422 | 2 Jenkins, Redhat | 3 Script Security, Ocp Tools, Openshift | 2025-04-02 | 8.8 High |
| A sandbox bypass vulnerability involving map constructors in Jenkins Script Security Plugin 1228.vd93135a_2fb_25 and earlier allows attackers with permission to define and run sandboxed scripts, including Pipelines, to bypass the sandbox protection and execute arbitrary code in the context of the Jenkins controller JVM. | ||||
| CVE-2023-0229 | 1 Redhat | 1 Openshift | 2025-04-01 | 6.3 Medium |
| A flaw was found in github.com/openshift/apiserver-library-go, used in OpenShift 4.12 and 4.11, that contains an issue that can allow low-privileged users to set the seccomp profile for pods they control to "unconfined." By default, the seccomp profile used in the restricted-v2 Security Context Constraint (SCC) is "runtime/default," allowing users to disable seccomp for pods they can create and modify. | ||||