| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.2 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper control of code generation. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.2 could allow an attacker with access to the server secret and Redis write access to submit a malicious serialized cache value. When the value was retrieved, deserialization could have executed attacker-controlled code with the privileges of the service process. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.2 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper control of generation of code. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.2 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper control of code generation. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.2 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to improper limitation of a pathname to a restricted directory. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.2 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to insufficiently protected credentials. |
| IBM Langflow OSS 1.0.0 through 1.12.2 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to exposure of sensitive information to an unauthorized actor. |
| IBM DataPower Gateway 10.6.0.0 through 10.6.0.10 is vulnerable to cross-site scripting. This vulnerability allows an unauthenticated user to embed arbitrary JavaScript code in the Web UI thus altering the intended functionality potentially leading to credentials disclosure within a trusted session. |
| 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 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 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. |
