Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2022-25878PUBLISHED: 2022-05-27
The package protobufjs before 6.11.3 are vulnerable to Prototype Pollution which can allow an attacker to add/modify properties of the Object.prototype.
This vulnerability can occur in multiple ways:
1. by providing untrusted user input to util.setProperty or to ReflectionObject.setParsedOption ...
CVE-2021-27780PUBLISHED: 2022-05-27The software may be vulnerable to both Un-Auth XML interaction and unauthenticated device enrollment.
CVE-2021-27781PUBLISHED: 2022-05-27The Master operator may be able to embed script tag in HTML with alert pop-up display cookie.
CVE-2022-1897PUBLISHED: 2022-05-27Out-of-bounds Write in GitHub repository vim/vim prior to 8.2.
CVE-2022-20666PUBLISHED: 2022-05-27
Multiple vulnerabilities in the web-based management interface of Cisco Common Services Platform Collector (CSPC) Software could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to conduct a cross-site scripting (XSS) attack against a user of the interface.
These vulnerabilities are due to insufficient va...
User Rank: Author
11/26/2015 | 1:54:33 AM
your pardon is granted. as with spam before it, spoofed source ddos and irresponsibly open servers have brought out every possible form of apologist. i have heard "there is no problem" and "it is not my problem" literally hundreds of times now. i won't take it personally, and i hope you won't take it personally when i tell you that you're plain and simply and completely wrong.
argument by analogy is fraught with error. as in this case, choosing the wrong analogy leads to absurd results. closer to the situation at hand would be holding the builder and architect of a house responsible if the house catches fire and burns the whole neighborhood down because somebody rang the doorbell too hard.
<< This all seems very huffy. The reality of crime is that bad guys often get away with their behavior, and we have to live with this unfairness lest we create even more unfairness. >>
you can live with whatever impositions you wish, but, you can't insist that i do the same. "the reality" as you call it is that in the real world, creating or operating a public nuisance is an actionable offense if someone is injured by it, and the internet has thus far yelled and screamed about "stifling innovation" whenever similar accountability and recourse has been proposed. well, i am not here to censor any content or demand that software creators be licensed or anything else that might stifle innovation.
rather, i'm saying that the collective nuisance cost of the internet's irresponsible device makers and server and network operators is now so high that even the most self deceiving apologist cannot successfully pretend that everything will be ok without giving the lawyers and insurance companies a more defined role.
vixie