Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2022-30333PUBLISHED: 2022-05-09RARLAB UnRAR before 6.12 on Linux and UNIX allows directory traversal to write to files during an extract (aka unpack) operation, as demonstrated by creating a ~/.ssh/authorized_keys file. NOTE: WinRAR and Android RAR are unaffected.
CVE-2022-23066PUBLISHED: 2022-05-09
In Solana rBPF versions 0.2.26 and 0.2.27 are affected by Incorrect Calculation which is caused by improper implementation of sdiv instruction. This can lead to the wrong execution path, resulting in huge loss in specific cases. For example, the result of a sdiv instruction may decide whether to tra...
CVE-2022-28463PUBLISHED: 2022-05-08ImageMagick 7.1.0-27 is vulnerable to Buffer Overflow.
CVE-2022-28470PUBLISHED: 2022-05-08marcador package in PyPI 0.1 through 0.13 included a code-execution backdoor.
CVE-2022-1620PUBLISHED: 2022-05-08NULL Pointer Dereference in function vim_regexec_string at regexp.c:2729 in GitHub repository vim/vim prior to 8.2.4901. NULL Pointer Dereference in function vim_regexec_string at regexp.c:2729 allows attackers to cause a denial of service (application crash) via a crafted input.
User Rank: Apprentice
5/24/2018 | 3:37:17 AM
In 2009, I finished a Master's Thesis on information security in the U.S. Government, one conclusion was that there should be a Cybersecurity Czar (or similar) in the government, answering directly to the President, with authority over the agencies in both branches, working in conjunction with the GAO (Government Accountability Office). Further reading after I finished the thesis revealed that at least two government-watching authorities were advising a similar office.
This recent move by the Trump Administration contradicts his election platform that supported strong information security\cybersecurity in the U.S. Government. Government agencies often rely on contractors to support their security posture, because there aren't enough security experts within the various branches. The same is true at the upper echelons of government. Our government needs advisors, and doing away with the cybersecurity advisor was a large step backward.
I anticipate additional steps in the wrong direction. I hope that such steps do not happen, yet this action seems like it may be part of a trend.
thanks,
Jan Buitron, MSIA, CISSP, Doctor of Computer Science candidate