In Mercurial before 4.4.1, it is possible that a specially malformed repository can cause Git subrepositories to run arbitrary code in the form of a .git/hooks/post-update script checked into the repository. Typical use of Mercurial prevents construction of such repositories, but they can be created programmatically.

The Microsoft Malware Protection Engine running on Microsoft Forefront and Microsoft Defender on Windows 7 SP1, Windows 8.1, Windows RT 8.1, Windows 10 Gold, 1511, 1607, and 1703, 1709 and Windows Server 2016, Windows Server, version 1709, Microsoft Exchange Server 2013 and 2016, does not properly scan a specially crafted file leading to remote code execution. aka "Microsoft Malware Protection Engine Remote Code Execution Vulnerability".

There is an overflow bug in the AVX2 Montgomery multiplication procedure used in exponentiation with 1024-bit moduli. No EC algorithms are affected. Analysis suggests that attacks against RSA and DSA as a result of this defect would be very difficult to perform and are not believed likely. Attacks against DH1024 are considered just feasible, because most of the work necessary to deduce information about a private key may be performed offline. The amount of resources required for such an attack would be significant. However, for an attack on TLS to be meaningful, the server would have to share the DH1024 private key among multiple clients, which is no longer an option since CVE-2016-0701. This only affects processors that support the AVX2 but not ADX extensions like Intel Haswell (4th generation). Note: The impact from this issue is similar to CVE-2017-3736, CVE-2017-3732 and CVE-2015-3193. OpenSSL version 1.0.2-1.0.2m and 1.1.0-1.1.0g are affected. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2n. Due to the low severity of this issue we are not issuing a new release of OpenSSL 1.1.0 at this time. The fix will be included in OpenSSL 1.1.0h when it becomes available. The fix is also available in commit e502cc86d in the OpenSSL git repository.

OpenSSL 1.0.2 (starting from version 1.0.2b) introduced an "error state" mechanism. The intent was that if a fatal error occurred during a handshake then OpenSSL would move into the error state and would immediately fail if you attempted to continue the handshake. This works as designed for the explicit handshake functions (SSL_do_handshake(), SSL_accept() and SSL_connect()), however due to a bug it does not work correctly if SSL_read() or SSL_write() is called directly. In that scenario, if the handshake fails then a fatal error will be returned in the initial function call. If SSL_read()/SSL_write() is subsequently called by the application for the same SSL object then it will succeed and the data is passed without being decrypted/encrypted directly from the SSL/TLS record layer. In order to exploit this issue an application bug would have to be present that resulted in a call to SSL_read()/SSL_write() being issued after having already received a fatal error. OpenSSL version 1.0.2b-1.0.2m are affected. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2n. OpenSSL 1.1.0 is not affected.

IBM Connections 5.5 is vulnerable to cross-site scripting. This vulnerability allows users to embed arbitrary JavaScript code in the Web UI thus altering the intended functionality potentially leading to credentials disclosure within a trusted session. IBM X-Force ID: 129020.

IBM Sterling File Gateway 2.2 could allow an unauthorized user to view files they should not have access to providing they know the directory location of the file. IBM X-Force ID: 128695.

IBM Sterling File Gateway 2.2 could allow an authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information such as login ids on the system. IBM X-Force ID: 128626.

IBM Sterling B2B Integrator Standard Edition 5.2 is vulnerable to cross-site scripting. This vulnerability allows users to embed arbitrary JavaScript code in the Web UI thus altering the intended functionality potentially leading to credentials disclosure within a trusted session. IBM X-Force ID: 128620.

IBM Sterling B2B Integrator Standard Edition 5.2 allows a user to view sensitive information that belongs to another user. IBM X-Force ID: 128619.

IBM TRIRIGA 3.2, 3.3, 3.4, and 3.5 could allow a remote attacker to hijack the clicking action of the victim. By persuading a victim to visit a malicious Web site, a remote attacker could exploit this vulnerability to hijack the victim's click actions and possibly launch further attacks against the victim. IBM X-Force ID: 128464.

IBM WebSphere MQ 7.5, 8.0, and 9.0 could allow an authenticated user to insert messages with a corrupt RFH header into the channel which would cause it to restart. IBM X-Force ID: 127803.

IBM Atlas eDiscovery Process Management 6.0.3 is vulnerable to SQL injection. A remote attacker could send specially-crafted SQL statements, which could allow the attacker to view, add, modify or delete information in the back-end database. IBM X-Force ID: 126683.

IBM Atlas eDiscovery Process Management 6.0.3 stores sensitive information in URL parameters. This may lead to information disclosure if unauthorized parties have access to the URLs via server logs, referrer header or browser history. IBM X-Force ID: 126682.

IBM Atlas eDiscovery Process Management 6.0.3 is vulnerable to cross-site scripting. This vulnerability allows users to embed arbitrary JavaScript code in the Web UI thus altering the intended functionality potentially leading to credentials disclosure within a trusted session. IBM X-Force ID: 126681.

IBM Atlas eDiscovery Process Management 6.0.3 could allow an authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information when an unsuspecting user clicks on unsafe third-party links. IBM X-Force ID: 126680.

IBM Insights Foundation for Energy 2.0 could reveal sensitive information in error messages to authenticated users that could e used to conduct further attacks. IBM X-Force ID: 126457.

IBM WebSphere MQ 8.0 and 9.0 could allow, under special circumstances, an unauthorized user to access an object which they should have been denied access. IBM X-Force ID: 126456.

IBM Infosphere BigInsights 4.2.0 could allow an attacker to inject code that could allow access to restricted data and files. IBM X-Force ID: 126244.

IBM Security Guardium 9.0, 9.1, and 9.5 supports interaction between multiple actors and allows those actors to negotiate which algorithm should be used as a protection mechanism such as encryption or authentication, but it does not select the strongest algorithm that is available to both parties. IBM X-Force ID: 124746.

Sangoma NetBorder / Vega Session Controller before 2.3.12-80-GA allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands via the web interface.