| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| IBM DataPower Gateway 10.5.0.0 through 10.5.0.22, 10.6.1 through 10.6.6, 10.6.0.0 through 10.6.0.10, and 11.0.0.0 through 11.0.0.2 could allow a local attacker to obtain sensitive information due to improper authorization. |
| IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote authenticated attacker to bypass security controls by forging user identities due to improper authorization. |
| IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote attacker to obtain sensitive information due to the use of a hard-coded or predictable cryptographic key. |
| IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information and forge authentication tags due to the use of hard-coded cryptographic keys and initialization vectors. |
| IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote attacker to forge validly-signed messages due to improper verification of cryptographic signatures. |
| IBM DataPower Gateway 10.5.0.0 through 10.5.0.22, 10.6.1 through 10.6.6, 10.6.0.0 through 10.6.0.10, and 11.0.0.0 through 11.0.0.2 could allow an authenticated user to forge signature requests due to improper verification of data authenticity. |
| IBM DataPower Gateway 10.5.0.0 through 10.5.0.22, 10.6.1 through 10.6.6, 10.6.0.0 through 10.6.0.10, and 11.0.0.0 through 11.0.0.2 could allow a remote attacker to cause a denial of service due to a heap-based buffer overflow. |
| IBM DataPower Gateway 10.5.0.0 through 10.5.0.22, 10.6.1 through 10.6.6, 10.6.0.0 through 10.6.0.10, and 11.0.0.0 through 11.0.0.2 could allow a remote attacker to cause a denial of service due to algorithmic complexity in linked-list traversal. |
| IBM DataPower Gateway 10.5.0.0 through 10.5.0.22, 10.6.1 through 10.6.6, 10.6.0.0 through 10.6.0.10, and 11.0.0.0 through 11.0.0.2 is vulnerable to an XML external entity injection (XXE) attack when processing XML data. A remote attacker could exploit this vulnerability to expose sensitive information or consume memory resources. |
| IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote attacker to perform unauthorized actions due to improper configuration of HTTP method-based security constraints. |
| IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper validation of a specified quantity. |
| IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow an adjacent-network attacker to execute arbitrary code due to deserialization of untrusted data. |
| IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a local attacker to obtain sensitive information and perform unauthorized actions due to insufficiently protected credentials. |
| IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a local attacker to gain unauthorized access to sensitive information and modify transaction data due to the use of hard-coded credentials. |
| IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) for RedHat OpenShift could allow a remote authenticated attacker to gain elevated privileges due to improper privilege management. |
| IBM DataPower Gateway 10.5.0.0 through 10.5.0.22, 10.6.1 through 10.6.6, 10.6.0.0 through 10.6.0.10, and 11.0.0.0 through 11.0.0.2 could allow a remote attacker to cause a denial of service due to a null pointer dereference. |
| IBM DataPower Gateway 10.5.0.0 through 10.5.0.22, 10.6.1 through 10.6.6, 10.6.0.0 through 10.6.0.10, and 11.0.0.0 through 11.0.0.2 could allow a remote attacker to cause a denial of service due to improper input validation. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.2 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper input validation. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.2 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary OS commands due to improper neutralization of special elements used in an OS command ('Code Injection'), aka improper control of code generation. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.2 could allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code due to an incomplete blocklist in the code security scanner. |
