Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2022-43665PUBLISHED: 2023-02-02A denial of service vulnerability exists in the malware scan functionality of ESTsoft Alyac 2.5.8.645. A specially-crafted PE file can lead to killing target process. An attacker can provide a malicious file to trigger this vulnerability.
CVE-2022-2546PUBLISHED: 2023-02-02
The All-in-One WP Migration WordPress plugin before 7.63 uses the wrong content type, and does not properly escape the response from the ai1wm_export AJAX action, allowing an attacker to craft a request that when submitted by any visitor will inject arbitrary html or javascript into the response tha...
CVE-2023-0400PUBLISHED: 2023-02-02
The protection bypass vulnerability in DLP for Windows 11.9.x is addressed in version 11.10.0. This allowed a local user to bypass DLP controls when uploading sensitive data from a mapped drive into a web email client. Loading from a local driver was correctly prevented. Versions prior to 11.9 corre...
CVE-2023-0637PUBLISHED: 2023-02-02
A vulnerability, which was classified as critical, was found in TRENDnet TEW-811DRU 1.0.10.0. This affects an unknown part of the file wan.asp of the component Web Management Interface. The manipulation leads to memory corruption. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit has been ...
CVE-2023-0638PUBLISHED: 2023-02-02
A vulnerability has been found in TRENDnet TEW-811DRU 1.0.10.0 and classified as critical. This vulnerability affects unknown code of the component Web Interface. The manipulation leads to command injection. The attack can be initiated remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may b...
User Rank: Moderator
9/3/2014 | 3:33:25 PM
It's a fine line, but a well understood distinction, especially in a legal liability sense. As with many things legal, check your intuition and sensibilities at the courthouse door.
That being said, I agree that it has definitely emerged to be in the best interest of the Fanchisor to, at the very least, specify security requirements (and probably enshrine it in the franchise agreement). The Franchisors could just as easily revoke the offending Franchisees to protect their reputation. In the vein of "every problem is an opportunity," the smart play would be for a Franchisor to impose security across the Franchise and provide value add to the Franchisees, as well as turn this into a feature of the Franchise -- great service and secure purchases now at *all* UPS Stores.