| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| A vulnerability has been identified in SIPROTEC 5 6MD84 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 6MD85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 6MD85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 6MD86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 6MD86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 6MD89 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 6MU85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7KE85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7KE85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7SA82 (CP100) (All versions < V8.90), SIPROTEC 5 7SA82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SA84 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SA86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SA86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SA87 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SA87 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SD82 (CP100) (All versions < V8.90), SIPROTEC 5 7SD82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SD84 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SD86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SD86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SD87 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SD87 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ81 (CP100) (All versions < V8.89), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ81 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ82 (CP100) (All versions < V8.89), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SJ86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SK82 (CP100) (All versions < V8.89), SIPROTEC 5 7SK82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SK85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SK85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SL82 (CP100) (All versions < V8.90), SIPROTEC 5 7SL82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SL86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SL86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SL87 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SL87 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SS85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7SS85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7ST85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7ST85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7ST86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7SX82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7SX85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7UM85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7UT82 (CP100) (All versions < V8.90), SIPROTEC 5 7UT82 (CP150) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7UT85 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7UT85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7UT86 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7UT86 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7UT87 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7UT87 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7VE85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 7VK87 (CP200) (All versions), SIPROTEC 5 7VK87 (CP300) (All versions < V9.65), SIPROTEC 5 7VU85 (CP300) (All versions < V9.64), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BA-2EL (Rev.1) (All versions < V9.62 installed on CP150 and CP300 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BA-2EL (Rev.1) (All versions installed on CP200 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BA-2EL (Rev.1) (All versions < V8.89 installed on CP100 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BB-2FO (Rev. 1) (All versions installed on CP200 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BB-2FO (Rev. 1) (All versions < V9.62 installed on CP150 and CP300 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BB-2FO (Rev. 1) (All versions < V8.89 installed on CP100 devices), SIPROTEC 5 Communication Module ETH-BD-2FO (All versions < V9.62), SIPROTEC 5 Compact 7SX800 (CP050) (All versions < V9.64). The affected devices are supporting weak ciphers on several ports (443/tcp for web, 4443/tcp for DIGSI 5 and configurable port for syslog over TLS).
This could allow an unauthorized attacker in a man-in-the-middle position to decrypt any data passed over to and from those ports. |
| A private key disclosure vulnerability exists in ZTE's ZXMP M721 product. A low-privileged user can bypass authorization checks to view the device's communication private key, resulting in key exposure and impacting communication security. |
| An unauthenticated remote attacker could exploit the used, insecure TLS 1.0 and TLS 1.1 protocols to intercept and manipulate encrypted communications between the Com-Server and connected systems. |
| Programs/P73_SimplePythonEncryption.py illustrates a simple Python encryption example using the RSA Algorithm. In versions prior to commit 6ce60b1, an attacker may be able to decrypt the data using brute force attacks and because of this the whole application can be impacted. This issue has been patched in commit 6ce60b1. A workaround involves increasing the key size, for RSA or DSA this is at least 2048 bits, for ECC this is at least 256 bits. |
| Cyberduck and Mountain Duck improper handle TLS certificate pinning for untrusted certificates (e.g., self-signed), since the certificate fingerprint is stored as SHA-1, although SHA-1 is considered weak.
This issue affects Cyberduck: through 9.1.6; Mountain Duck: through 4.17.5. |
| jose v6.0.10 was discovered to contain weak encryption. NOTE: this is disputed by a third party because the claim of "do not meet recommended security standards" does not reflect guidance in a final publication. |
| ruby-jwt v3.0.0.beta1 was discovered to contain weak encryption. NOTE: the Supplier's perspective is "keysize is not something that is enforced by this library. Currently more recent versions of OpenSSL are enforcing some key sizes and those restrictions apply to the users of this gem also." |
| Keysight Ixia Vision has an issue with hardcoded cryptographic material
which may allow an attacker to intercept or decrypt payloads sent to the
device via API calls or user authentication if the end user does not
replace the TLS certificate that shipped with the device. Remediation is
available in Version 6.9.1, released on September 23, 2025. |
| Reusing a nonce, key pair in encryption issue exists in "FreeFrom - the nostr client" App versions prior to 1.3.5 for Android and iOS. If this vulnerability is exploited, the content of direct messages (DMs) between users may be manipulated by a man-in-the-middle attack. |
| Use of Hard-coded Cryptographic Key vulnerability in ABB RMC-100, ABB RMC-100 LITE.
An attacker can gain access to salted information to decrypt MQTT information.
This issue affects RMC-100: from 2105457-043 through 2105457-045; RMC-100 LITE: from 2106229-015 through 2106229-016. |
| The Copypress Rest API plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to Remote Code Execution via copyreap_handle_image() Function in versions 1.1 to 1.2. The plugin falls back to a hard-coded JWT signing key when no secret is defined and does not restrict which file types can be fetched and saved as attachments. As a result, unauthenticated attackers can forge a valid token to gain elevated privileges and upload an arbitrary file (e.g. a PHP script) through the image handler, leading to remote code execution. |
| CGGMP24 is a state-of-art ECDSA TSS protocol that supports 1-round signing (requires 3 preprocessing rounds), identifiable abort, and a key refresh protocol. In versions 0.6.3 and prior of cggmp21 and version 0.7.0-alpha.1 of cggmp24, presignatures can be used in the way that significantly reduces security. cggmp24 version 0.7.0-alpha.2 release contains API changes that make it impossible to use presignatures in contexts in which it reduces security. |
| Padding oracle attack vulnerability in Oberon microsystem AG’s Oberon PSA Crypto library in all versions since 1.0.0 and prior to 1.5.1 allows an attacker to recover plaintexts via timing measurements of AES-CBC PKCS#7 decrypt operations. |
| The vulnerability, if exploited, could allow a miscreant with read
access to Edge Project files or Edge Offline Cache files to reverse
engineer Edge users' app-native or Active Directory passwords through
computational brute-forcing of weak hashes. |
| The device is observed to accept deprecated TLS protocols, increasing the risk of cryptographic weaknesses. |
| jsrsasign v11.1.0 was discovered to contain weak encryption. NOTE: this issue has been disputed by a third party who believes that CVE IDs can be assigned for key lengths in specific applications that use a library, and should not be assigned to the default key lengths in a library. This dispute is subject to review under CNA rules 4.1.4, 4.1.14, and other rules; the dispute tagging is not meant to recommend an outcome for this CVE Record. |
| Besu Native contains scripts and tooling that is used to build and package the native libraries used by the Ethereum client Hyperledger Besu. Besu 24.7.1 through 25.2.2, corresponding to besu-native versions 0.9.0 through 1.2.1, have a potential consensus bug for the precompiles ALTBN128_ADD (0x06), ALTBN128_MUL (0x07), and ALTBN128_PAIRING (0x08). These precompiles were reimplemented in besu-native using gnark-crypto's bn254 implementation, as the former implementation used a library which was no longer maintained and not sufficiently performant. The new gnark implementation was initially added in version 0.9.0 of besu-native but was not utilized by Besu until version 0.9.2 in Besu 24.7.1. The issue is that there are EC points which may be crafted which are in the correct subgroup but are not on the curve and the besu-native gnark implementation was relying on subgroup checks to perform point-on-curve checks as well. The version of gnark-crypto used at the time did not do this check when performing subgroup checks. The result is that it was possible for Besu to give an incorrect result and fall out of consensus when executing one of these precompiles against a specially crafted input point. Additionally, homogenous Besu-only networks can potentially enshrine invalid state which would be incorrect and difficult to process with patched versions of besu which handle these calls correctly. The underlying defect has been patched in besu-native release 1.3.0. The fixed version of Besu is version 25.3.0. As a workaround for versions of Besu with the problem, the native precompile for altbn128 may be disabled in favor of the pure-java implementation. The pure java implementation is significantly slower, but does not have this consensus issue. |
| A vulnerability has been found in MartialBE one-hub up to 0.14.27. This vulnerability affects unknown code of the file docker-compose.yml. The manipulation of the argument SESSION_SECRET leads to use of hard-coded cryptographic key
. The attack may be initiated remotely. The complexity of an attack is rather high. It is stated that the exploitability is difficult. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. It is recommended to change the configuration settings. The code maintainer recommends (translated from Chinese): "The default docker-compose example file is not recommended for production use. If you intend to use it in production, please carefully check and modify every configuration and environment variable yourself!" |
| The web server of Lawo AG vsm LTC Time Sync (vTimeSync) is affected by a "..." (triple dot) path traversal vulnerability. By sending a specially crafted HTTP request, an unauthenticated remote attacker could download arbitrary files from the operating system. As a limitation, the exploitation is only possible if the requested file has some file extension, e. g. .exe or .txt. |
| Polkadot Frontier is an Ethereum and EVM compatibility layer for Polkadot and Substrate. In versions prior to commit 36f70d1, the Curve25519Add and Curve25519ScalarMul precompiles incorrectly handle invalid Ristretto point representations. Instead of returning an error, they silently treat invalid input bytes as the Ristretto identity element, leading to potentially incorrect cryptographic results. This is fixed in commit 36f70d1. |
