Filtered by vendor Mcafee
Subscribe
Total
605 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v2 | CVSS v3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2014-8528 | 1 Mcafee | 1 Network Data Loss Prevention | 2025-04-12 | 2.1 LOW | N/A |
| McAfee Network Data Loss Prevention (NDLP) before 9.3 logs session IDs, which allows local users to obtain sensitive information by reading the audit log. | |||||
| CVE-2015-1619 | 1 Mcafee | 1 Email Gateway | 2025-04-12 | 3.5 LOW | N/A |
| Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the Secure Web Mail Client user interface in McAfee Email Gateway (MEG) 7.6.x before 7.6.3.2, 7.5.x before 75.6, 7.0.x through 7.0.5, 5.6, and earlier allows remote authenticated users to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via unspecified tokens in Digest messages. | |||||
| CVE-2016-0718 | 9 Apple, Canonical, Debian and 6 more | 14 Mac Os X, Ubuntu Linux, Debian Linux and 11 more | 2025-04-12 | 7.5 HIGH | 9.8 CRITICAL |
| Expat allows context-dependent attackers to cause a denial of service (crash) or possibly execute arbitrary code via a malformed input document, which triggers a buffer overflow. | |||||
| CVE-2015-7612 | 1 Mcafee | 1 Vulnerability Manager | 2025-04-12 | 6.8 MEDIUM | N/A |
| Multiple cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerabilities in the Organizations page in Enterprise Manager in McAfee Vulnerability Manager (MVM) 7.5.9 and earlier allow remote attackers to hijack the authentication of administrators for requests that have unspecified impact via unknown vectors. | |||||
| CVE-2014-8533 | 1 Mcafee | 1 Network Data Loss Prevention | 2025-04-12 | 7.5 HIGH | N/A |
| McAfee Network Data Loss Prevention (NDLP) before 9.3 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via vectors related to ICMP redirection. | |||||
| CVE-2015-0921 | 1 Mcafee | 1 Epolicy Orchestrator | 2025-04-12 | 4.0 MEDIUM | N/A |
| XML external entity (XXE) vulnerability in the Server Task Log in McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator (ePO) before 4.6.9 and 5.x before 5.1.2 allows remote authenticated users to read arbitrary files via the conditionXML parameter to the taskLogTable to orionUpdateTableFilter.do. | |||||
| CVE-2015-2757 | 1 Mcafee | 1 Data Loss Prevention Endpoint | 2025-04-12 | 4.0 MEDIUM | N/A |
| The ePO extension in McAfee Data Loss Prevention Endpoint (DLPe) before 9.3 Patch 4 Hotfix 16 (9.3.416.4) allows remote authenticated users to cause a denial of service (database lock or license corruption) via unspecified vectors. | |||||
| CVE-2016-3983 | 1 Mcafee | 1 Advanced Threat Defense | 2025-04-12 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| McAfee Advanced Threat Defense (ATD) before 3.4.8.178 might allow remote attackers to bypass malware detection by leveraging information about the parent process. | |||||
| CVE-2023-24579 | 1 Mcafee | 1 Total Protection | 2025-03-03 | N/A | 5.5 MEDIUM |
| McAfee Total Protection prior to 16.0.51 allows attackers to trick a victim into uninstalling the application via the command prompt. | |||||
| CVE-2023-24577 | 1 Mcafee | 1 Total Protection | 2025-03-03 | N/A | 5.5 MEDIUM |
| McAfee Total Protection prior to 16.0.50 allows attackers to elevate user privileges due to Improper Link Resolution via registry keys. This could enable a user with lower privileges to execute unauthorized tasks. | |||||
| CVE-2023-25134 | 1 Mcafee | 1 Total Protection | 2025-02-28 | N/A | 6.7 MEDIUM |
| McAfee Total Protection prior to 16.0.50 may allow an adversary (with full administrative access) to modify a McAfee specific Component Object Model (COM) in the Windows Registry. This can result in the loading of a malicious payload. | |||||
| CVE-2023-24578 | 1 Mcafee | 1 Total Protection | 2025-02-27 | N/A | 5.5 MEDIUM |
| McAfee Total Protection prior to 16.0.49 allows attackers to elevate user privileges due to DLL sideloading. This could enable a user with lower privileges to execute unauthorized tasks. | |||||
| CVE-2019-9514 | 13 Apache, Apple, Canonical and 10 more | 30 Traffic Server, Mac Os X, Swiftnio and 27 more | 2025-01-14 | 7.8 HIGH | 7.5 HIGH |
| Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to a reset flood, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker opens a number of streams and sends an invalid request over each stream that should solicit a stream of RST_STREAM frames from the peer. Depending on how the peer queues the RST_STREAM frames, this can consume excess memory, CPU, or both. | |||||
| CVE-2019-9513 | 12 Apache, Apple, Canonical and 9 more | 22 Traffic Server, Mac Os X, Swiftnio and 19 more | 2025-01-14 | 7.8 HIGH | 7.5 HIGH |
| Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to resource loops, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker creates multiple request streams and continually shuffles the priority of the streams in a way that causes substantial churn to the priority tree. This can consume excess CPU. | |||||
| CVE-2019-9518 | 11 Apache, Apple, Canonical and 8 more | 20 Traffic Server, Mac Os X, Swiftnio and 17 more | 2025-01-14 | 7.8 HIGH | 7.5 HIGH |
| Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to a flood of empty frames, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker sends a stream of frames with an empty payload and without the end-of-stream flag. These frames can be DATA, HEADERS, CONTINUATION and/or PUSH_PROMISE. The peer spends time processing each frame disproportionate to attack bandwidth. This can consume excess CPU. | |||||
| CVE-2019-9511 | 12 Apache, Apple, Canonical and 9 more | 22 Traffic Server, Mac Os X, Swiftnio and 19 more | 2025-01-14 | 7.8 HIGH | 7.5 HIGH |
| Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to window size manipulation and stream prioritization manipulation, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker requests a large amount of data from a specified resource over multiple streams. They manipulate window size and stream priority to force the server to queue the data in 1-byte chunks. Depending on how efficiently this data is queued, this can consume excess CPU, memory, or both. | |||||
| CVE-2019-9515 | 12 Apache, Apple, Canonical and 9 more | 24 Traffic Server, Mac Os X, Swiftnio and 21 more | 2025-01-14 | 7.8 HIGH | 7.5 HIGH |
| Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to a settings flood, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker sends a stream of SETTINGS frames to the peer. Since the RFC requires that the peer reply with one acknowledgement per SETTINGS frame, an empty SETTINGS frame is almost equivalent in behavior to a ping. Depending on how efficiently this data is queued, this can consume excess CPU, memory, or both. | |||||
| CVE-2019-9517 | 12 Apache, Apple, Canonical and 9 more | 25 Http Server, Traffic Server, Mac Os X and 22 more | 2025-01-14 | 7.8 HIGH | 7.5 HIGH |
| Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to unconstrained interal data buffering, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker opens the HTTP/2 window so the peer can send without constraint; however, they leave the TCP window closed so the peer cannot actually write (many of) the bytes on the wire. The attacker then sends a stream of requests for a large response object. Depending on how the servers queue the responses, this can consume excess memory, CPU, or both. | |||||
| CVE-2019-9516 | 12 Apache, Apple, Canonical and 9 more | 21 Traffic Server, Mac Os X, Swiftnio and 18 more | 2025-01-14 | 6.8 MEDIUM | 6.5 MEDIUM |
| Some HTTP/2 implementations are vulnerable to a header leak, potentially leading to a denial of service. The attacker sends a stream of headers with a 0-length header name and 0-length header value, optionally Huffman encoded into 1-byte or greater headers. Some implementations allocate memory for these headers and keep the allocation alive until the session dies. This can consume excess memory. | |||||
| CVE-2023-5445 | 1 Mcafee | 1 Epolicy Orchestrator | 2024-11-21 | N/A | 5.4 MEDIUM |
| An open redirect vulnerability in ePolicy Orchestrator prior to 5.10.0 CP1 Update 2, allows a remote low privileged user to modify the URL parameter for the purpose of redirecting URL request(s) to a malicious site. This impacts the dashboard area of the user interface. A user would need to be logged into ePO to trigger this vulnerability. To exploit this the attacker must change the HTTP payload post submission, prior to it reaching the ePO server. | |||||