Filtered by vendor Redhat
Subscriptions
Filtered by product Rhel Eus
Subscriptions
Total
3019 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2024-8382 | 2 Mozilla, Redhat | 9 Firefox, Firefox Esr, Thunderbird and 6 more | 2025-11-04 | 8.8 High |
| Internal browser event interfaces were exposed to web content when privileged EventHandler listener callbacks ran for those events. Web content that tried to use those interfaces would not be able to use them with elevated privileges, but their presence would indicate certain browser features had been used, such as when a user opened the Dev Tools console. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 130, Firefox ESR < 128.2, Firefox ESR < 115.15, Thunderbird < 128.2, and Thunderbird < 115.15. | ||||
| CVE-2024-8381 | 2 Mozilla, Redhat | 8 Firefox, Firefox Esr, Enterprise Linux and 5 more | 2025-11-04 | 9.8 Critical |
| A potentially exploitable type confusion could be triggered when looking up a property name on an object being used as the `with` environment. This vulnerability affects Firefox < 130, Firefox ESR < 128.2, Firefox ESR < 115.15, Thunderbird < 128.2, and Thunderbird < 115.15. | ||||
| CVE-2024-6345 | 2 Python, Redhat | 10 Setuptools, Enterprise Linux, Openshift and 7 more | 2025-11-04 | 8.8 High |
| A vulnerability in the package_index module of pypa/setuptools versions up to 69.1.1 allows for remote code execution via its download functions. These functions, which are used to download packages from URLs provided by users or retrieved from package index servers, are susceptible to code injection. If these functions are exposed to user-controlled inputs, such as package URLs, they can execute arbitrary commands on the system. The issue is fixed in version 70.0. | ||||
| CVE-2024-32465 | 2 Git, Redhat | 3 Git, Enterprise Linux, Rhel Eus | 2025-11-04 | 7.4 High |
| Git is a revision control system. The Git project recommends to avoid working in untrusted repositories, and instead to clone it first with `git clone --no-local` to obtain a clean copy. Git has specific protections to make that a safe operation even with an untrusted source repository, but vulnerabilities allow those protections to be bypassed. In the context of cloning local repositories owned by other users, this vulnerability has been covered in CVE-2024-32004. But there are circumstances where the fixes for CVE-2024-32004 are not enough: For example, when obtaining a `.zip` file containing a full copy of a Git repository, it should not be trusted by default to be safe, as e.g. hooks could be configured to run within the context of that repository. The problem has been patched in versions 2.45.1, 2.44.1, 2.43.4, 2.42.2, 2.41.1, 2.40.2, and 2.39.4. As a workaround, avoid using Git in repositories that have been obtained via archives from untrusted sources. | ||||
| CVE-2024-32021 | 2 Git, Redhat | 3 Git, Enterprise Linux, Rhel Eus | 2025-11-04 | 3.9 Low |
| Git is a revision control system. Prior to versions 2.45.1, 2.44.1, 2.43.4, 2.42.2, 2.41.1, 2.40.2, and 2.39.4, when cloning a local source repository that contains symlinks via the filesystem, Git may create hardlinks to arbitrary user-readable files on the same filesystem as the target repository in the `objects/` directory. Cloning a local repository over the filesystem may creating hardlinks to arbitrary user-owned files on the same filesystem in the target Git repository's `objects/` directory. When cloning a repository over the filesystem (without explicitly specifying the `file://` protocol or `--no-local`), the optimizations for local cloning will be used, which include attempting to hard link the object files instead of copying them. While the code includes checks against symbolic links in the source repository, which were added during the fix for CVE-2022-39253, these checks can still be raced because the hard link operation ultimately follows symlinks. If the object on the filesystem appears as a file during the check, and then a symlink during the operation, this will allow the adversary to bypass the check and create hardlinks in the destination objects directory to arbitrary, user-readable files. The problem has been patched in versions 2.45.1, 2.44.1, 2.43.4, 2.42.2, 2.41.1, 2.40.2, and 2.39.4. | ||||
| CVE-2024-32004 | 2 Git, Redhat | 6 Git, Enterprise Linux, Rhel Aus and 3 more | 2025-11-04 | 8.2 High |
| Git is a revision control system. Prior to versions 2.45.1, 2.44.1, 2.43.4, 2.42.2, 2.41.1, 2.40.2, and 2.39.4, an attacker can prepare a local repository in such a way that, when cloned, will execute arbitrary code during the operation. The problem has been patched in versions 2.45.1, 2.44.1, 2.43.4, 2.42.2, 2.41.1, 2.40.2, and 2.39.4. As a workaround, avoid cloning repositories from untrusted sources. | ||||
| CVE-2024-32002 | 2 Git, Redhat | 6 Git, Enterprise Linux, Rhel Aus and 3 more | 2025-11-04 | 9.1 Critical |
| Git is a revision control system. Prior to versions 2.45.1, 2.44.1, 2.43.4, 2.42.2, 2.41.1, 2.40.2, and 2.39.4, repositories with submodules can be crafted in a way that exploits a bug in Git whereby it can be fooled into writing files not into the submodule's worktree but into a `.git/` directory. This allows writing a hook that will be executed while the clone operation is still running, giving the user no opportunity to inspect the code that is being executed. The problem has been patched in versions 2.45.1, 2.44.1, 2.43.4, 2.42.2, 2.41.1, 2.40.2, and 2.39.4. If symbolic link support is disabled in Git (e.g. via `git config --global core.symlinks false`), the described attack won't work. As always, it is best to avoid cloning repositories from untrusted sources. | ||||
| CVE-2024-28835 | 1 Redhat | 2 Enterprise Linux, Rhel Eus | 2025-11-04 | 5 Medium |
| A flaw has been discovered in GnuTLS where an application crash can be induced when attempting to verify a specially crafted .pem bundle using the "certtool --verify-chain" command. | ||||
| CVE-2024-28834 | 1 Redhat | 2 Enterprise Linux, Rhel Eus | 2025-11-04 | 5.3 Medium |
| A flaw was found in GnuTLS. The Minerva attack is a cryptographic vulnerability that exploits deterministic behavior in systems like GnuTLS, leading to side-channel leaks. In specific scenarios, such as when using the GNUTLS_PRIVKEY_FLAG_REPRODUCIBLE flag, it can result in a noticeable step in nonce size from 513 to 512 bits, exposing a potential timing side-channel. | ||||
| CVE-2024-23185 | 1 Redhat | 2 Enterprise Linux, Rhel Eus | 2025-11-04 | 7.5 High |
| Very large headers can cause resource exhaustion when parsing message. The message-parser normally reads reasonably sized chunks of the message. However, when it feeds them to message-header-parser, it starts building up "full_value" buffer out of the smaller chunks. The full_value buffer has no size limit, so large headers can cause large memory usage. It doesn't matter whether it's a single long header line, or a single header split into multiple lines. This bug exists in all Dovecot versions. Incoming mails typically have some size limits set by MTA, so even largest possible header size may still fit into Dovecot's vsz_limit. So attackers probably can't DoS a victim user this way. A user could APPEND larger mails though, allowing them to DoS themselves (although maybe cause some memory issues for the backend in general). One can implement restrictions on headers on MTA component preceding Dovecot. No publicly available exploits are known. | ||||
| CVE-2024-23184 | 1 Redhat | 2 Enterprise Linux, Rhel Eus | 2025-11-04 | 5 Medium |
| Having a large number of address headers (From, To, Cc, Bcc, etc.) becomes excessively CPU intensive. With 100k header lines CPU usage is already 12 seconds, and in a production environment we observed 500k header lines taking 18 minutes to parse. Since this can be triggered by external actors sending emails to a victim, this is a security issue. An external attacker can send specially crafted messages that consume target system resources and cause outage. One can implement restrictions on address headers on MTA component preceding Dovecot. No publicly available exploits are known. | ||||
| CVE-2024-22025 | 1 Redhat | 3 Enterprise Linux, Rhel E4s, Rhel Eus | 2025-11-04 | 6.5 Medium |
| A vulnerability in Node.js has been identified, allowing for a Denial of Service (DoS) attack through resource exhaustion when using the fetch() function to retrieve content from an untrusted URL. The vulnerability stems from the fact that the fetch() function in Node.js always decodes Brotli, making it possible for an attacker to cause resource exhaustion when fetching content from an untrusted URL. An attacker controlling the URL passed into fetch() can exploit this vulnerability to exhaust memory, potentially leading to process termination, depending on the system configuration. | ||||
| CVE-2024-22019 | 4 Netapp, Node.js, Nodejs and 1 more | 6 Astra Control Center, Node.js, Node.js and 3 more | 2025-11-04 | 7.5 High |
| A vulnerability in Node.js HTTP servers allows an attacker to send a specially crafted HTTP request with chunked encoding, leading to resource exhaustion and denial of service (DoS). The server reads an unbounded number of bytes from a single connection, exploiting the lack of limitations on chunk extension bytes. The issue can cause CPU and network bandwidth exhaustion, bypassing standard safeguards like timeouts and body size limits. | ||||
| CVE-2023-5841 | 2 Openexr, Redhat | 4 Openexr, Enterprise Linux, Rhel E4s and 1 more | 2025-11-04 | 9.1 Critical |
| Due to a failure in validating the number of scanline samples of a OpenEXR file containing deep scanline data, Academy Software Foundation OpenEX image parsing library version 3.2.1 and prior is susceptible to a heap-based buffer overflow vulnerability. This issue was resolved as of versions v3.2.2 and v3.1.12 of the affected library. | ||||
| CVE-2023-47235 | 2 Frrouting, Redhat | 3 Frrouting, Enterprise Linux, Rhel Eus | 2025-11-04 | 6.8 Medium |
| An issue was discovered in FRRouting FRR through 9.0.1. A crash can occur when a malformed BGP UPDATE message with an EOR is processed, because the presence of EOR does not lead to a treat-as-withdraw outcome. | ||||
| CVE-2023-47234 | 2 Frrouting, Redhat | 3 Frrouting, Enterprise Linux, Rhel Eus | 2025-11-04 | 7.5 High |
| An issue was discovered in FRRouting FRR through 9.0.1. A crash can occur when processing a crafted BGP UPDATE message with a MP_UNREACH_NLRI attribute and additional NLRI data (that lacks mandatory path attributes). | ||||
| CVE-2023-38407 | 2 Frrouting, Redhat | 3 Frrouting, Enterprise Linux, Rhel Eus | 2025-11-04 | 7.5 High |
| bgpd/bgp_label.c in FRRouting (FRR) before 8.5 attempts to read beyond the end of the stream during labeled unicast parsing. | ||||
| CVE-2023-38406 | 2 Frrouting, Redhat | 3 Frrouting, Enterprise Linux, Rhel Eus | 2025-11-04 | 9.8 Critical |
| bgpd/bgp_flowspec.c in FRRouting (FRR) before 8.4.3 mishandles an nlri length of zero, aka a "flowspec overflow." | ||||
| CVE-2023-32559 | 2 Nodejs, Redhat | 4 Node.js, Nodejs, Enterprise Linux and 1 more | 2025-11-04 | 7.5 High |
| A privilege escalation vulnerability exists in the experimental policy mechanism in all active release lines: 16.x, 18.x and, 20.x. The use of the deprecated API `process.binding()` can bypass the policy mechanism by requiring internal modules and eventually take advantage of `process.binding('spawn_sync')` run arbitrary code, outside of the limits defined in a `policy.json` file. Please note that at the time this CVE was issued, the policy is an experimental feature of Node.js. | ||||
| CVE-2023-30590 | 2 Nodejs, Redhat | 3 Node.js, Enterprise Linux, Rhel Eus | 2025-11-04 | 7.5 High |
| The generateKeys() API function returned from crypto.createDiffieHellman() only generates missing (or outdated) keys, that is, it only generates a private key if none has been set yet, but the function is also needed to compute the corresponding public key after calling setPrivateKey(). However, the documentation says this API call: "Generates private and public Diffie-Hellman key values". The documented behavior is very different from the actual behavior, and this difference could easily lead to security issues in applications that use these APIs as the DiffieHellman may be used as the basis for application-level security, implications are consequently broad. | ||||