CVE Database

Improper neutralization of input during web page generation ('cross-site scripting') in Microsoft Office SharePoint allows an unauthorized attacker to perform spoofing over a network.

Improper neutralization of input during web page generation ('cross-site scripting') in Microsoft Office SharePoint allows an authorized attacker to perform spoofing over a network.

Improper neutralization of input during web page generation ('cross-site scripting') in Microsoft Office SharePoint allows an authorized attacker to perform spoofing over a network.

Improper neutralization of input during web page generation ('cross-site scripting') in Microsoft Office SharePoint allows an unauthorized attacker to perform spoofing over a network.

Relative path traversal in Visual Studio Code allows an unauthorized attacker to perform tampering over a network.

Exposure of sensitive information to an unauthorized actor in Visual Studio Code allows an unauthorized attacker to disclose information over a network.

Protection mechanism failure in Windows BitLocker allows an unauthorized attacker to bypass a security feature with a physical attack.

User interface (ui) misrepresentation of critical information in Microsoft Bing allows an unauthorized attacker to perform spoofing over a network.

Time-of-check time-of-use (toctou) race condition in Microsoft Defender for Endpoint allows an authorized attacker to elevate privileges locally.

Out-of-bounds read in Windows DHCP Server allows an authorized attacker to disclose information locally.

Out-of-bounds read in Windows DHCP Client allows an unauthorized attacker to disclose information locally.

Out-of-bounds read in Microsoft UxTheme Library (uxtheme.dll) allows an authorized attacker to deny service locally.

Out-of-bounds read in Windows Application Identity (AppID) Subsystem allows an authorized attacker to disclose information locally.

Protection mechanism failure in Windows Mark of the Web (MOTW) allows an unauthorized attacker to bypass a security feature over a network.

Exposure of sensitive information to an unauthorized actor in Windows Application Identity (AppID) Subsystem allows an authorized attacker to disclose information locally.

Server-side request forgery (ssrf) in Microsoft Exchange Server allows an authorized attacker to disclose information over a network.

Server-side request forgery (ssrf) in Microsoft Exchange Server allows an authorized attacker to perform spoofing over a network.

Improper neutralization of input during web page generation ('cross-site scripting') in Microsoft Exchange Server allows an unauthorized attacker to perform spoofing over a network.

Improper link resolution before file access ('link following') in .NET allows an unauthorized attacker to perform tampering locally.

Improper neutralization of input during web page generation ('cross-site scripting') in Microsoft Office Project Server allows an authorized attacker to perform spoofing over a network.

Improper neutralization of input during web page generation ('cross-site scripting') in Microsoft Office SharePoint allows an authorized attacker to perform spoofing over a network.

Improper neutralization of input during web page generation ('cross-site scripting') in Microsoft Office SharePoint allows an authorized attacker to perform spoofing over a network.

Improper neutralization of input during web page generation ('cross-site scripting') in Microsoft Office SharePoint allows an authorized attacker to perform spoofing over a network.

Improper neutralization of input during web page generation ('cross-site scripting') in Microsoft Office SharePoint allows an unauthorized attacker to perform spoofing over a network.

Improper neutralization of input during web page generation ('cross-site scripting') in Microsoft Office SharePoint allows an unauthorized attacker to perform spoofing over a network.

Improper neutralization of input during web page generation ('cross-site scripting') in Microsoft Office SharePoint allows an authorized attacker to perform spoofing over a network.

Buffer over-read in Microsoft Office allows an unauthorized attacker to disclose information locally.

Improper limitation of a pathname to a restricted directory ('path traversal') in Microsoft Office SharePoint allows an authorized attacker to execute code over a network.

Improper neutralization of input during web page generation ('cross-site scripting') in Microsoft Office SharePoint allows an unauthorized attacker to perform spoofing over a network.

Issue summary: The implementations of AES-SIV (RFC 5297) and AES-GCM-SIV (RFC 8452) mishandle the authentication of AAD (Additional Authenticated Data) with an empty ciphertext allowing a forgery of such messages. Impact summary: An attacker can forge empty messages with arbitrary AAD to the victim's application using these ciphers. AES-SIV (RFC 5297) and AES-GCM-SIV (RFC 8452) are nonce-misuse-resistant AEAD modes: they accept a key, nonce, optional AAD (bytes that are authenticated but not encrypted), and plaintext, and produces ciphertext plus a 16-byte tag. On decrypt, `EVP_DecryptFinal_ex()` is documented to return success only if the tag is verified succesfully. In OpenSSL's provider implementation of these ciphers, the expected tag is computed only when decryption function is invoked with non-empty data. If the caller supplies AAD and then calls `EVP_DecryptFinal_ex()` without invocation of the ciphertext update, which can happen when the received ciphertext length is zero, the tag is never recalculated and still holds its all-zeros value. When AES-GCM-SIV is used, an attacker who sends arbitrary AAD, empty ciphertext, and all-zeros tag passes authentication under any key they do not know, single-shot. When AES-SIV is used, for mounting the attack it's necessary for the application to reuse the decryption context without resetting the key. AES-SIV is implemented since OpenSSL 3.0. AES-GCM-SIV is implemented since OpenSSL 3.2. No protocols implemented in OpenSSL itself (TLS/CMS/PKCS7/HPKE/QUIC) support either AES-GCM-SIV or AES-SIV. To mount an attack, the applications must implement their own protocol and use the EVP interface. Also they must skip the ciphertext update when a message with an empty ciphertext arrives. The FIPS modules in 4.0, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, and 3.0 are not affected by this issue, as these algorithms are not FIPS approved and the affected code is outside the OpenSSL FIPS module boundary.