The Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) project, maintained by the MITRE Corporation, is a list of all standardized names for vulnerabilities and security exposures.
| ID | Description | Priority | Modified date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2019-1586 | A vulnerability in Cisco Application Policy Infrastructure Controller (APIC) Software could allow an unauthenticated, local attacker with physical access to obtain sensitive information from an affected device. The vulnerability is due to insecure removal of cleartext encryption keys stored on local partitions in the hard drive of an affected device. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by retrieving data from the physical disk on the affected partition(s). A successful exploit could allow the attacker to retrieve encryption keys, possibly allowing the attacker to further decrypt other data and sensitive information on the device, which could lead to the disclosure of confidential information. | LOW | May 7, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1585 | A vulnerability in the controller authorization functionality of Cisco Nexus 9000 Series ACI Mode Switch Software could allow an authenticated, local attacker to escalate standard users with root privilege on an affected device. The vulnerability is due to a misconfiguration of certain sudoers files for the bashroot component on an affected device. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by authenticating to the affected device with a crafted user ID, which may allow temporary administrative access to escalate privileges. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to escalate privileges on an affected device. This Vulnerability has been fixed in version 4.0(1h) | HIGH | Mar 22, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1584 | A security vulnerability exists in Zingbox Inspector version 1.293 and earlier, that allows for remote code execution if the Inspector were sent a malicious command from the Zingbox cloud, or if the Zingbox Inspector were tampered with to connect to an attacker\'s cloud endpoint. | MEDIUM | Oct 11, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1583 | Escalation of privilege vulnerability in the Palo Alto Networks Twistlock console 19.07.358 and earlier allows a Twistlock user with Operator capabilities to escalate privileges to that of another user. Active interaction with an affected component is required for the payload to execute on the victim. | MEDIUM | Aug 30, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1582 | Memory corruption in PAN-OS 8.1.9 and earlier, and PAN-OS 9.0.3 and earlier will allow an administrative user to cause arbitrary memory corruption by rekeying the current client interactive session. | MEDIUM | Aug 30, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1581 | A remote code execution vulnerability in the PAN-OS SSH device management interface that can lead to unauthenticated remote users with network access to the SSH management interface gaining root access to PAN-OS. This issue affects PAN-OS 7.1 versions prior to 7.1.24-h1, 7.1.25; 8.0 versions prior to 8.0.19-h1, 8.0.20; 8.1 versions prior to 8.1.9-h4, 8.1.10; 9.0 versions prior to 9.0.3-h3, 9.0.4. | High | Aug 28, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1580 | Memory corruption in PAN-OS 7.1.24 and earlier, PAN-OS 8.0.19 and earlier, PAN-OS 8.1.9 and earlier, and PAN-OS 9.0.3 and earlier will allow a remote, unauthenticated user to craft a message to Secure Shell Daemon (SSHD) and corrupt arbitrary memory. | HIGH | Aug 30, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1579 | Remote Code Execution in PAN-OS 7.1.18 and earlier, PAN-OS 8.0.11-h1 and earlier, and PAN-OS 8.1.2 and earlier with GlobalProtect Portal or GlobalProtect Gateway Interface enabled may allow an unauthenticated remote attacker to execute arbitrary code. | MEDIUM | Jul 26, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1578 | Cross-site scripting vulnerability in Palo Alto Networks MineMeld version 0.9.60 and earlier may allow a remote attacker able to convince an authenticated MineMeld admin to type malicious input in the MineMeld UI could execute arbitrary JavaScript code in the admin’s browser. | Medium | Jul 8, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1577 | Code injection vulnerability in Palo Alto Networks Traps 5.0.5 and earlier may allow an authenticated attacker to inject arbitrary JavaScript or HTML. | MEDIUM | Jul 2, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1576 | Command injection in PAN-0S 9.0.2 and earlier may allow an authenticated attacker to gain access to a remote shell in PAN-OS, and potentially run with the escalated user’s permissions. | Medium | Jul 18, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1575 | Information disclosure in PAN-OS 7.1.23 and earlier, PAN-OS 8.0.18 and earlier, PAN-OS 8.1.8-h4 and earlier, and PAN-OS 9.0.2 and earlier may allow for an authenticated user with read-only privileges to extract the API key of the device and/or the username/password from the XML API (in PAN-OS) and possibly escalate privileges granted to them. | MEDIUM | Jul 19, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1574 | Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Palo Alto Networks Expedition Migration tool 1.1.12 and earlier may allow an authenticated attacker to run arbitrary JavaScript or HTML in the Devices View. | LOW | Apr 15, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1573 | GlobalProtect Agent 4.1.0 for Windows and GlobalProtect Agent 4.1.10 and earlier for macOS may allow a local authenticated attacker who has compromised the end-user account and gained the ability to inspect memory, to access authentication and/or session tokens and replay them to spoof the VPN session and gain access as the user. | High | Apr 11, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1572 | ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2019-1571. Reason: This candidate is a reservation duplicate of CVE-2019-1571. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2019-1571 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usage. | -- | Mar 28, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1571 | The Expedition Migration tool 1.1.8 and earlier may allow an authenticated attacker to run arbitrary JavaScript or HTML in the RADIUS server settings. | LOW | Mar 28, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1570 | The Expedition Migration tool 1.1.8 and earlier may allow an authenticated attacker to run arbitrary JavaScript or HTML in the LDAP server settings. | LOW | Mar 28, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1569 | The Expedition Migration tool 1.1.8 and earlier may allow an authenticated attacker to run arbitrary JavaScript or HTML in the User Mapping Settings for account name of admin user. | LOW | Mar 28, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1568 | Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Palo Alto Networks Demisto 4.5 build 40249 may allow an unauthenticated attacker to run arbitrary JavaScript or HTML. | MEDIUM | May 10, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1567 | The Expedition Migration tool 1.1.6 and earlier may allow an authenticated attacker to run arbitrary JavaScript or HTML in the User Mapping Settings. | LOW | Apr 10, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1566 | The PAN-OS management web interface in PAN-OS 7.1.21 and earlier, PAN-OS 8.0.14 and earlier, and PAN-OS 8.1.5 and earlier, may allow an unauthenticated attacker to inject arbitrary JavaScript or HTML. | Medium | Jan 31, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1565 | The PAN-OS external dynamics lists in PAN-OS 7.1.21 and earlier, PAN-OS 8.0.14 and earlier, and PAN-OS 8.1.5 and earlier, may allow an attacker that is authenticated in Next Generation Firewall with write privileges to External Dynamic List configuration to inject arbitrary JavaScript or HTML. | Low | Jan 31, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1564 | Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues during [2019]. Notes: none | -- | Nov 7, 2023 |
| CVE-2019-1563 | In situations where an attacker receives automated notification of the success or failure of a decryption attempt an attacker, after sending a very large number of messages to be decrypted, can recover a CMS/PKCS7 transported encryption key or decrypt any RSA encrypted message that was encrypted with the public RSA key, using a Bleichenbacher padding oracle attack. Applications are not affected if they use a certificate together with the private RSA key to the CMS_decrypt or PKCS7_decrypt functions to select the correct recipient info to decrypt. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1d (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1c). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.0l (Affected 1.1.0-1.1.0k). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2t (Affected 1.0.2-1.0.2s). | Medium | Sep 12, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1562 | Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues during [2019]. Notes: none | -- | Nov 7, 2023 |
| CVE-2019-1561 | Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues during [2019]. Notes: none | -- | Nov 7, 2023 |
| CVE-2019-1560 | Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues during [2019]. Notes: none | -- | Nov 7, 2023 |
| CVE-2019-1559 | If an application encounters a fatal protocol error and then calls SSL_shutdown() twice (once to send a close_notify, and once to receive one) then OpenSSL can respond differently to the calling application if a 0 byte record is received with invalid padding compared to if a 0 byte record is received with an invalid MAC. If the application then behaves differently based on that in a way that is detectable to the remote peer, then this amounts to a padding oracle that could be used to decrypt data. In order for this to be exploitable non-stitched ciphersuites must be in use. Stitched ciphersuites are optimised implementations of certain commonly used ciphersuites. Also the application must call SSL_shutdown() twice even if a protocol error has occurred (applications should not do this but some do anyway). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2r (Affected 1.0.2-1.0.2q). | Medium | Mar 26, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1558 | Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues during [2019]. Notes: none | -- | Nov 7, 2023 |
| CVE-2019-1557 | Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues during [2019]. Notes: none | -- | Nov 7, 2023 |
| CVE-2019-1556 | Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues during [2019]. Notes: none | -- | Nov 7, 2023 |
| CVE-2019-1555 | Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues during [2019]. Notes: none | -- | Nov 7, 2023 |
| CVE-2019-1554 | Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues during [2019]. Notes: none | -- | Nov 7, 2023 |
| CVE-2019-1553 | Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues during [2019]. Notes: none | -- | Nov 7, 2023 |
| CVE-2019-1552 | OpenSSL has internal defaults for a directory tree where it can find a configuration file as well as certificates used for verification in TLS. This directory is most commonly referred to as OPENSSLDIR, and is configurable with the --prefix / --openssldir configuration options. For OpenSSL versions 1.1.0 and 1.1.1, the mingw configuration targets assume that resulting programs and libraries are installed in a Unix-like environment and the default prefix for program installation as well as for OPENSSLDIR should be \'/usr/local\'. However, mingw programs are Windows programs, and as such, find themselves looking at sub-directories of \'C:/usr/local\', which may be world writable, which enables untrusted users to modify OpenSSL\'s default configuration, insert CA certificates, modify (or even replace) existing engine modules, etc. For OpenSSL 1.0.2, \'/usr/local/ssl\' is used as default for OPENSSLDIR on all Unix and Windows targets, including Visual C builds. However, some build instructions for the diverse Windows targets on 1.0.2 encourage you to specify your own --prefix. OpenSSL versions 1.1.1, 1.1.0 and 1.0.2 are affected by this issue. Due to the limited scope of affected deployments this has been assessed as low severity and therefore we are not creating new releases at this time. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1d (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1c). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.0l (Affected 1.1.0-1.1.0k). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2t (Affected 1.0.2-1.0.2s). | LOW | Jul 30, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1551 | There is an overflow bug in the x64_64 Montgomery squaring procedure used in exponentiation with 512-bit moduli. No EC algorithms are affected. Analysis suggests that attacks against 2-prime RSA1024, 3-prime RSA1536, and DSA1024 as a result of this defect would be very difficult to perform and are not believed likely. Attacks against DH512 are considered just feasible. However, for an attack the target would have to re-use the DH512 private key, which is not recommended anyway. Also applications directly using the low level API BN_mod_exp may be affected if they use BN_FLG_CONSTTIME. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1e (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1d). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2u (Affected 1.0.2-1.0.2t). | MEDIUM | Dec 6, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1550 | Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues during [2019]. Notes: none | -- | Nov 7, 2023 |
| CVE-2019-1549 | OpenSSL 1.1.1 introduced a rewritten random number generator (RNG). This was intended to include protection in the event of a fork() system call in order to ensure that the parent and child processes did not share the same RNG state. However this protection was not being used in the default case. A partial mitigation for this issue is that the output from a high precision timer is mixed into the RNG state so the likelihood of a parent and child process sharing state is significantly reduced. If an application already calls OPENSSL_init_crypto() explicitly using OPENSSL_INIT_ATFORK then this problem does not occur at all. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1d (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1c). | Medium | Sep 12, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1548 | Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues during [2019]. Notes: none | -- | Nov 7, 2023 |
| CVE-2019-1547 | Normally in OpenSSL EC groups always have a co-factor present and this is used in side channel resistant code paths. However, in some cases, it is possible to construct a group using explicit parameters (instead of using a named curve). In those cases it is possible that such a group does not have the cofactor present. This can occur even where all the parameters match a known named curve. If such a curve is used then OpenSSL falls back to non-side channel resistant code paths which may result in full key recovery during an ECDSA signature operation. In order to be vulnerable an attacker would have to have the ability to time the creation of a large number of signatures where explicit parameters with no co-factor present are in use by an application using libcrypto. For the avoidance of doubt libssl is not vulnerable because explicit parameters are never used. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1d (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1c). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.0l (Affected 1.1.0-1.1.0k). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2t (Affected 1.0.2-1.0.2s). | Low | Sep 12, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1546 | Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues during [2019]. Notes: none | -- | Nov 7, 2023 |
| CVE-2019-1545 | Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues during [2019]. Notes: none | -- | Nov 7, 2023 |
| CVE-2019-1544 | Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues during [2019]. Notes: none | -- | Nov 7, 2023 |
| CVE-2019-1543 | ChaCha20-Poly1305 is an AEAD cipher, and requires a unique nonce input for every encryption operation. RFC 7539 specifies that the nonce value (IV) should be 96 bits (12 bytes). OpenSSL allows a variable nonce length and front pads the nonce with 0 bytes if it is less than 12 bytes. However it also incorrectly allows a nonce to be set of up to 16 bytes. In this case only the last 12 bytes are significant and any additional leading bytes are ignored. It is a requirement of using this cipher that nonce values are unique. Messages encrypted using a reused nonce value are susceptible to serious confidentiality and integrity attacks. If an application changes the default nonce length to be longer than 12 bytes and then makes a change to the leading bytes of the nonce expecting the new value to be a new unique nonce then such an application could inadvertently encrypt messages with a reused nonce. Additionally the ignored bytes in a long nonce are not covered by the integrity guarantee of this cipher. Any application that relies on the integrity of these ignored leading bytes of a long nonce may be further affected. Any OpenSSL internal use of this cipher, including in SSL/TLS, is safe because no such use sets such a long nonce value. However user applications that use this cipher directly and set a non-default nonce length to be longer than 12 bytes may be vulnerable. OpenSSL versions 1.1.1 and 1.1.0 are affected by this issue. Due to the limited scope of affected deployments this has been assessed as low severity and therefore we are not creating new releases at this time. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1c (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1b). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.0k (Affected 1.1.0-1.1.0j). | Medium | Mar 15, 2019 |
| CVE-2019-1542 | Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues during [2019]. Notes: none | -- | Nov 7, 2023 |
| CVE-2019-1541 | Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues during [2019]. Notes: none | -- | Nov 7, 2023 |
| CVE-2019-1540 | Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues during [2019]. Notes: none | -- | Nov 7, 2023 |
| CVE-2019-1539 | Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues during [2019]. Notes: none | -- | Nov 7, 2023 |
| CVE-2019-1538 | Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues during [2019]. Notes: none | -- | Nov 7, 2023 |
| CVE-2019-1537 | Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues during [2019]. Notes: none | -- | Nov 7, 2023 |
