When a device using Juniper Network's Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol Daemon (JDHCPD) process on Junos OS or Junos OS Evolved which is configured in relay mode it vulnerable to an attacker sending crafted IPv4 packets who may then arbitrarily execute commands as root on the target device. This issue affects IPv4 JDHCPD services. This issue affects: Juniper Networks Junos OS: 15.1 versions prior to 15.1R7-S6; 15.1X49 versions prior to 15.1X49-D200; 15.1X53 versions prior to 15.1X53-D592; 16.1 versions prior to 16.1R7-S6; 16.2 versions prior to 16.2R2-S11; 17.1 versions prior to 17.1R2-S11, 17.1R3-S1; 17.2 versions prior to 17.2R2-S8, 17.2R3-S3; 17.3 versions prior to 17.3R3-S6; 17.4 versions prior to 17.4R2-S7, 17.4R3; 18.1 versions prior to 18.1R3-S8; 18.2 versions prior to 18.2R3-S2; 18.2X75 versions prior to 18.2X75-D60; 18.3 versions prior to 18.3R1-S6, 18.3R2-S2, 18.3R3; 18.4 versions prior to 18.4R1-S5, 18.4R2-S3, 18.4R3; 19.1 versions prior to 19.1R1-S3, 19.1R2; 19.2 versions prior to 19.2R1-S3, 19.2R2*. and All versions prior to 19.3R1 on Junos OS Evolved. This issue do not affect versions of Junos OS prior to 15.1, or JDHCPD operating as a local server in non-relay mode.

On EX4300, EX4600, QFX3500, and QFX5100 Series, a vulnerability in the IP firewall filter component may cause the firewall filter evaluation of certain packets to fail. This issue only affects firewall filter evaluation of certain packets destined to the device Routing Engine (RE). This issue does not affect the Layer 2 firewall filter evaluation nor does it affect the Layer 3 firewall filter evaluation destined to connected hosts. This issue may occur when evaluating both IPv4 or IPv6 packets. This issue affects Juniper Networks Junos OS: 14.1X53 versions prior to 14.1X53-D12 on QFX5100 Series and EX4600 Series; 14.1X53 versions prior to 14.1X53-D52 on QFX3500 Series; 14.1X53 versions prior to 14.1X53-D48 on EX4300 Series; 15.1 versions prior to 15.1R7-S3 on EX4300 Series; 16.1 versions prior to 16.1R7 on EX4300 Series; 17.1 versions prior to 17.1R3 on EX4300 Series; 17.2 versions prior to 17.2R3 on EX4300 Series; 17.3 versions prior to 17.3R2-S5, 17.3R3 on EX4300 Series; 17.4 versions prior to 17.4R2 on EX4300 Series; 18.1 versions prior to 18.1R3 on EX4300 Series; 18.2 versions prior to 18.2R2 on EX4300 Series.

Specific IPv6 packets sent by clients processed by the Routing Engine (RE) are improperly handled. These IPv6 packets are designed to be blocked by the RE from egressing the RE. Instead, the RE allows these specific IPv6 packets to egress the RE, at which point a mbuf memory leak occurs within the Juniper Networks Junos OS device. This memory leak eventually leads to a kernel crash (vmcore), or the device hanging and requiring a power cycle to restore service, creating a Denial of Service (DoS) condition. During the time where mbufs are rising, yet not fully filled, some traffic from client devices may begin to be black holed. To be black holed, this traffic must match the condition where this traffic must be processed by the RE. Continued receipt and attempted egress of these specific IPv6 packets from the Routing Engine (RE) will create an extended Denial of Service (DoS) condition. Scenarios which have been observed are: 1. In a single chassis, single RE scenario, the device will hang without vmcore, or a vmcore may occur and then hang. In this scenario the device needs to be power cycled. 2. In a single chassis, dual RE scenario, the device master RE will fail over to the backup RE. In this scenario, the master and the backup REs need to be reset from time to time when they vmcore. There is no need to power cycle the device. 3. In a dual chassis, single RE scenario, the device will hang without vmcore, or a vmcore may occur and then hang. In this scenario, the two chassis' design relies upon some type of network level redundancy - VRRP, GRES, NSR, etc. - 3.a In a commanded switchover, where nonstop active routing (NSR) is enabled no session loss is observed. 4. In a dual chassis, dual chassis scenario, rely upon the RE to RE failover as stated in the second scenario. In the unlikely event that the device does not switch RE to RE gracefully, then the fallback position is to the network level services scenario in the third scenario. This issue affects: Juniper Networks Junos OS 16.1 versions prior to 16.1R7-S6; 16.1 version 16.1X70-D10 and later; 16.2 versions prior to 16.2R2-S11; 17.1 versions prior to 17.1R2-S11, 17.1R3-S1; 17.2 versions prior to 17.2R1-S9, 17.2R2-S8, 17.2R3-S3; 17.3 versions prior to 17.3R3-S6; 17.4 versions prior to 17.4R2-S9, 17.4R3; 18.1 versions prior to 18.1R3-S7; 18.2 versions prior to 18.2R3-S2; 18.2X75 versions prior to 18.2X75-D50, 18.2X75-D410; 18.3 versions prior to 18.3R1-S6, 18.3R2-S2, 18.3R3; 18.4 versions prior to 18.4R1-S6, 18.4R2-S2, 18.4R3; 19.1 versions prior to 19.1R1-S3, 19.1R2; 19.2 versions prior to 19.2R1-S2, 19.2R2. This issue does not affect releases prior to Junos OS 16.1R1.

When a device using Juniper Network's Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol Daemon (JDHCPD) process on Junos OS or Junos OS Evolved which is configured in relay mode it vulnerable to an attacker sending crafted IPv4 packets who may remotely take over the code execution of the JDHDCP process. This issue affect IPv4 JDHCPD services. This issue affects: Juniper Networks Junos OS: 15.1 versions prior to 15.1R7-S6; 15.1X49 versions prior to 15.1X49-D200; 15.1X53 versions prior to 15.1X53-D592; 16.1 versions prior to 16.1R7-S6; 16.2 versions prior to 16.2R2-S11; 17.1 versions prior to 17.1R2-S11, 17.1R3-S1; 17.2 versions prior to 17.2R2-S8, 17.2R3-S3; 17.3 versions prior to 17.3R3-S6; 17.4 versions prior to 17.4R2-S7, 17.4R3; 18.1 versions prior to 18.1R3-S8; 18.2 versions prior to 18.2R3-S2; 18.2X75 versions prior to 18.2X75-D60; 18.3 versions prior to 18.3R1-S6, 18.3R2-S2, 18.3R3; 18.4 versions prior to 18.4R1-S5, 18.4R2-S3, 18.4R3; 19.1 versions prior to 19.1R1-S3, 19.1R2; 19.2 versions prior to 19.2R1-S3, 19.2R2*. and All versions prior to 19.3R1 on Junos OS Evolved. This issue do not affect versions of Junos OS prior to 15.1, or JDHCPD operating as a local server in non-relay mode.

Certain types of malformed Path Computation Element Protocol (PCEP) packets when received and processed by a Juniper Networks Junos OS device serving as a Path Computation Client (PCC) in a PCEP environment using Juniper's path computational element protocol daemon (pccd) process allows an attacker to cause the pccd process to crash and generate a core file thereby causing a Denial of Service (DoS). Continued receipt of this family of malformed PCEP packets will cause an extended Denial of Service (DoS) condition. This issue affects: Juniper Networks Junos OS: 15.1 versions prior to 15.1F6-S13, 15.1R7-S4; 15.1X49 versions prior to 15.1X49-D180 on SRX Series; 15.1X53 versions prior to 15.1X53-D238, 15.1X53-D496, 15.1X53-D592; 16.1 versions prior to 16.1R7-S4; 16.2 versions prior to 16.2R2-S9; 17.1 versions prior to 17.1R2-S11, 17.1R3; 17.2 versions prior to 17.2R1-S9; 17.2 version 17.2R2 and later prior to 17.2R3-S2; 17.3 versions prior to 17.3R3-S3; 17.4 versions prior to 17.4R2-S2, 17.4R3; 18.1 versions prior to 18.1R3-S2; 18.2 versions prior to 18.2R2-S6, 18.2R3; 18.2X75 versions prior to 18.2X75-D40; 18.3 versions prior to 18.3R2; 18.4 versions prior to 18.4R1-S2, 18.4R2. This issue does not affect releases of Junos OS prior to 15.1R1.

In a Point-to-Multipoint (P2MP) Label Switched Path (LSP) scenario, an uncontrolled resource consumption vulnerability in the Routing Protocol Daemon (RPD) in Juniper Networks Junos OS allows a specific SNMP request to trigger an infinite loop causing a high CPU usage Denial of Service (DoS) condition. This issue affects both SNMP over IPv4 and IPv6. This issue affects: Juniper Networks Junos OS: 12.3X48 versions prior to 12.3X48-D90; 15.1 versions prior to 15.1R7-S6; 15.1X49 versions prior to 15.1X49-D200; 15.1X53 versions prior to 15.1X53-D238, 15.1X53-D592; 16.1 versions prior to 16.1R7-S5; 16.2 versions prior to 16.2R2-S11; 17.1 versions prior to 17.1R3-S1; 17.2 versions prior to 17.2R3-S2; 17.3 versions prior to 17.3R3-S7; 17.4 versions prior to 17.4R2-S4, 17.4R3; 18.1 versions prior to 18.1R3-S5; 18.2 versions prior to 18.2R3; 18.2X75 versions prior to 18.2X75-D50; 18.3 versions prior to 18.3R2; 18.4 versions prior to 18.4R2; 19.1 versions prior to 19.1R2.

data_input.php in Cacti 1.2.8 allows remote code execution via a crafted Input String to Data Collection -> Data Input Methods -> Unix -> Ping Host. NOTE: the vendor has stated "This is a false alarm.

phpBB 3.2.8 allows a CSRF attack that can approve pending group memberships.

phpBB 3.2.8 allows a CSRF attack that can modify a group avatar.

A cross site scripting vulnerability exists when Microsoft Dynamics 365 (on-premises) does not properly sanitize a specially crafted web request to an affected Dynamics server, aka 'Microsoft Dynamics 365 (On-Premise) Cross Site Scripting Vulnerability'.

A security feature bypass vulnerability exists in Microsoft OneDrive App for Android.This could allow an attacker to bypass the passcode or fingerprint requirements of the App.The security update addresses the vulnerability by correcting the way Microsoft OneDrive App for Android handles sharing links., aka 'Microsoft OneDrive for Android Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability'.

A remote code execution vulnerability exists in Microsoft Excel software when the software fails to properly handle objects in memory, aka 'Microsoft Excel Remote Code Execution Vulnerability'. This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2020-0650, CVE-2020-0651.

A remote code execution vulnerability exists in Microsoft Office software when the software fails to properly handle objects in memory, aka 'Microsoft Office Memory Corruption Vulnerability'.

A remote code execution vulnerability exists in Microsoft Excel software when the software fails to properly handle objects in memory, aka 'Microsoft Excel Remote Code Execution Vulnerability'. This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2020-0650, CVE-2020-0653.

A remote code execution vulnerability exists in Microsoft Excel software when the software fails to properly handle objects in memory, aka 'Microsoft Excel Remote Code Execution Vulnerability'. This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2020-0651, CVE-2020-0653.

A spoofing vulnerability exists when Office Online does not validate origin in cross-origin communications correctly, aka 'Microsoft Office Online Spoofing Vulnerability'.

A remote code execution vulnerability exists when the Microsoft .NET Framework fails to validate input properly, aka '.NET Framework Remote Code Execution Injection Vulnerability'.

An elevation of privilege vulnerability exists when Microsoft Windows implements predictable memory section names, aka 'Windows Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability'. This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2020-0635.

An information disclosure vulnerability exists in the way that the Windows Graphics Device Interface Plus (GDI+) handles objects in memory, allowing an attacker to retrieve information from a targeted system, aka 'Windows GDI+ Information Disclosure Vulnerability'.

An elevation of privilege vulnerability exists in Windows when the Win32k component fails to properly handle objects in memory, aka 'Win32k Elevation of Privilege Vulnerability'. This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2020-0624.