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: Ninja
8/16/2018 | 2:02:01 PM
1. This vulnerability existing since the late 90s - to now, this was discussed years ago and no one except the researchers from three-four prominent schools that disseminated this information to the public - https://meltdownattack.com/. Intel knew about this vulnerability and did nothing about it for years and only until the researchers from Google, Univ of MD, Univ, Graz Univ of Technology, Adelaide and others presented this information is only then Intel decided to move in the direction to provide microcode or patches to address the problem. When did accountability leave the room?
2. Did Intel present this information to the public or were they forced by the researchers (Project Zero concepts, they give you 30 days to fix the problem) after they found other bugs in their existing CPU (microcode)? Again, another question where their reputation is on the line, they only react as opposed to working together as a team to resolve impending issues.
3. If Edward Snowden did not present this information to the public, this vulnerability would have still been out there without the public knowing about it (Thank you Mr. Snowden where ever you are, he stated NSA was using the vulnerabilities found to create backdoors, was this the case or not, we will never know).
This is not the only company that has tried to coverup their shortcomings (Booz Allen, Northrup Grumman, Lockheed Martin, Suntrust, Cryptocurrenty, S3 buckets (Accenture). I mean the list goes on and on.
At what point do you say, enough is enough, because the only thing the individuals got from Equifax hack was a $50 gift certificate they could use on their own hacked infrastructure. That is almost saying that I am betting on you in a fight after you already got knocked out.
List of others, actually from this site:
I think the security practices and ways of securing the environment is not working, we need to find another way, something that keeps the companies accountable (BlockChain in the supply chain space), employ IPv6 in everything we do and ride ourselves from IPv4 (Networking), encrypt the data at rest (Bitlocker disk encryption where it does not give the user a choice, especially if it is used to entrust user data, PGP Disk encryption works as well) and eventually look at other micro-processor manufacturers like Nvidia or IBM Power CPUs (especially when Intel did nothing after 20 years of knowing there was a problem).
Please give me some of your thoughts, anyone.
T