| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| An improper authentication vulnerability exists in curl 7.33.0 to and including 7.82.0 which might allow reuse OAUTH2-authenticated connections without properly making sure that the connection was authenticated with the same credentials as set for this transfer. This affects SASL-enabled protocols: SMPTP(S), IMAP(S), POP3(S) and LDAP(S) (openldap only). |
| SEPPmail Secure Email Gateway before version 15.0.1 improperly validates S/MIME certificates issued for email addresses containing whitespaces, allowing signature spoofing. |
| Wallos is an open-source, self-hostable personal subscription tracker. Prior to version 4.6.2, there is a server-side request forgery vulnerability in notification testers. This issue has been patched in version 4.6.2. |
| A flaw was found in fog-kubevirt. This vulnerability allows a remote attacker to perform a Man-in-the-Middle (MITM) attack due to disabled certificate validation. This enables the attacker to intercept and potentially alter sensitive communications between Satellite and OpenShift, resulting in information disclosure and data integrity compromise. |
| Improper Input Validation vulnerability in Apache Tomcat Native, Apache Tomcat.
When using an OCSP responder, Tomcat Native (and Tomcat's FFM port of the Tomcat Native code) did not complete verification or freshness checks on the OCSP response which could allow certificate revocation to be bypassed.
This issue affects Apache Tomcat Native: from 1.3.0 through 1.3.4, from 2.0.0 through 2.0.11; Apache Tomcat: from 11.0.0-M1 through 11.0.17, from 10.1.0-M7 through 10.1.51, from 9.0.83 through 9.0.114.
The following versions were EOL at the time the CVE was created but are
known to be affected: from 1.1.23 through 1.1.34, from 1.2.0 through 1.2.39. Older EOL versions are not affected.
Apache Tomcat Native users are recommended to upgrade to versions 1.3.5 or later or 2.0.12 or later, which fix the issue.
Apache Tomcat users are recommended to upgrade to versions 11.0.18 or later, 10.1.52 or later or 9.0.115 or later which fix the issue. |
| Improper Certificate Validation vulnerability in rustdesk-client RustDesk Client rustdesk-client on Windows, MacOS, Linux, iOS, Android (HTTP API client, TLS transport modules) allows Adversary in the Middle (AiTM). This vulnerability is associated with program files src/hbbs_http/http_client.Rs and program routines TLS retry with danger_accept_invalid_certs(true).
This issue affects RustDesk Client: through 1.4.5. |
| Taipower APP for Andorid developed by Taipower has an Improper Certificate Validation vulnerability. When establishing an HTTPS connection with the server, the application fails to verify the server-side TLS/SSL certificate. This flaw allows an unauthenticated remote attackers to exploit the vulnerability to perform a Man-in-the-Middle (MITM) attack to read and tamper with network packets. |
| Acrobat Reader versions 24.001.30307, 24.001.30308, 25.001.21265 and earlier are affected by an Improper Certificate Validation vulnerability that could result in a Security feature bypass. An attacker could leverage this vulnerability to spoof the identity of a signer. Exploitation of this issue requires user interaction. |
| In the client side of Heimdal before 7.6.0, failure to verify anonymous PKINIT PA-PKINIT-KX key exchange permits a man-in-the-middle attack. This issue is in krb5_init_creds_step in lib/krb5/init_creds_pw.c. |
| Improper certificate validation in Azure Local allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network. |
| Improper certificate validation in the identity provider connection components in Amazon Athena ODBC driver before 2.1.0.0 might allow a man-in-the-middle threat actor to intercept authentication credentials due to insufficient default transport security when connecting to identity providers. This only applies to connections with external identity providers and does not apply to connections with Athena.
To remediate this issue, users should upgrade to version 2.1.0.0. |
| A vulnerability was reported in the Lenovo LeCloud client application that, under certain conditions, could allow information disclosure. |
| Akka.NET is a .NET port of the Akka project from the Scala / Java community. In all versions of Akka.Remote from v1.2.0 to v1.5.51, TLS could be enabled via our `akka.remote.dot-netty.tcp` transport and this would correctly enforce private key validation on the server-side of inbound connections. Akka.Remote, however, never asked the outbound-connecting client to present ITS certificate - therefore it's possible for untrusted parties to connect to a private key'd Akka.NET cluster and begin communicating with it without any certificate. The issue here is that for certificate-based authentication to work properly, ensuring that all members of the Akka.Remote network are secured with the same private key, Akka.Remote needed to implement mutual TLS. This was not the case before Akka.NET v1.5.52. Those who run Akka.NET inside a private network that they fully control or who were never using TLS in the first place are now affected by the bug. However, those who use TLS to secure their networks must upgrade to Akka.NET V1.5.52 or later. One patch forces "fail fast" semantics if TLS is enabled but the private key is missing or invalid. Previous versions would only check that once connection attempts occurred. The second patch, a critical fix, enforces mutual TLS (mTLS) by default, so both parties must be keyed using the same certificate. As a workaround, avoid exposing the application publicly to avoid the vulnerability having a practical impact on one's application. However, upgrading to version 1.5.52 is still recommended by the maintainers. |
| GoSign Desktop through 2.4.1 disables TLS certificate validation when configured to use a proxy server. This can be problematic if the GoSign Desktop user selects an arbitrary proxy server without consideration of whether outbound HTTPS connections from the proxy server to Internet servers succeed even for untrusted or invalid server certificates. In this scenario (which is outside of the product's design objectives), integrity protection could be bypassed. In typical cases of a proxy server for outbound HTTPS traffic from an enterprise, those connections would not succeed. (Admittedly, the usual expectation is that a client application is configured to trust an enterprise CA and does not set SSL_VERIFY_NONE.) Also, it is of course unsafe to place ~/.gosign in the home directory of an untrusted user and then have other users execute downloaded files. |
| A vulnerability in the meeting-join functionality of Cisco Webex Meetings could have allowed an unauthenticated, network-proximate attacker to complete a meeting-join process in place of an intended targeted user, provided the requisite conditions were satisfied. Cisco has addressed this vulnerability in the Cisco Webex Meetings service, and no customer action is needed.
This vulnerability existed due to client certificate validation issues. Prior to this vulnerability being addressed, an attacker could have exploited this vulnerability by monitoring local wireless or adjacent networks for client-join requests and attempting to interrupt and complete the meeting-join flow as another user who was currently joining a meeting. To successfully exploit the vulnerability, an attacker would need the capability to position themselves in a local wireless or adjacent network, to monitor and intercept the targeted network traffic flows, and to satisfy timing requirements in order to interrupt the meeting-join flow and exploit the vulnerability. A successful exploit could have allowed the attacker to join the meeting as another user. However, the Cisco Product Security Incident Response Team (PSIRT) is not aware of any malicious use of the vulnerability that is described in this advisory. |
| A vulnerability has been identified in Solid Edge SE2025 (All versions < V225.0 Update 11). Affected applications do not properly validate client certificates to connect to License Service endpoint. This could allow an unauthenticated remote attacker to perform man in the middle attacks. |
| PaperCut Print Deploy is an optional component that integrates with PaperCut NG/MF which simplifies printer deployment and management. When the component is deployed to an environment, the customer has an option to configure the system to use a self-signed certificate. If the customer does not fully configure the system to leverage the trust database on the clients, it opens up the communication between clients and the server to man-in-the-middle attacks.
It was discovered that certain parts of the documentation related to the configuration of SSL in Print Deploy were lacking, which could potentially contribute to a misconfiguration of the Print Deploy client installation. PaperCut strongly recommends to use valid certificates to secure installations and to follow the updated documentation to ensure the correct SSL configuration. Those who use private CAs and/or self-signed certificates should make sure to copy their Certification Authority certificate, or their self signed certificate if using only one, to the trust store of their operating system and to the Java key store |
| MicroWorld eScan AV's update mechanism failed to ensure authenticity and integrity of updates: update packages were delivered and accepted without robust cryptographic verification. As a result, an on-path attacker could perform a man-in-the-middle (MitM) attack and substitute malicious update payloads for legitimate ones. The eScan AV client accepted these substituted packages and executed or loaded their components (including sideloaded DLLs and Java/installer payloads), enabling remote code execution on affected systems. MicroWorld eScan confirmed remediation of the update mechanism on 2023-07-31 but versioning details are unavailable. NOTE: MicroWorld eScan disputes the characterization in third-party reports, stating the issue relates to 2018–2019 and that controls were implemented then. |
| Issue summary: Clients using RFC7250 Raw Public Keys (RPKs) to authenticate a
server may fail to notice that the server was not authenticated, because
handshakes don't abort as expected when the SSL_VERIFY_PEER verification mode
is set.
Impact summary: TLS and DTLS connections using raw public keys may be
vulnerable to man-in-middle attacks when server authentication failure is not
detected by clients.
RPKs are disabled by default in both TLS clients and TLS servers. The issue
only arises when TLS clients explicitly enable RPK use by the server, and the
server, likewise, enables sending of an RPK instead of an X.509 certificate
chain. The affected clients are those that then rely on the handshake to
fail when the server's RPK fails to match one of the expected public keys,
by setting the verification mode to SSL_VERIFY_PEER.
Clients that enable server-side raw public keys can still find out that raw
public key verification failed by calling SSL_get_verify_result(), and those
that do, and take appropriate action, are not affected. This issue was
introduced in the initial implementation of RPK support in OpenSSL 3.2.
The FIPS modules in 3.4, 3.3, 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected by this issue. |
| In Yealink RPS before 2025-05-26, the certificate upload function does not properly validate certificate content, potentially allowing invalid certificates to be uploaded. |
