IBM i is Affected By An Improper Privilege Management Vulnerability
IBM i 7.3, 7.4, 7.5, and 7.6 could allow a local attacker to modify the BOOTP table due to improper authorization.
Export limit exceeded: 425829 CVEs match your query. Please refine your search to export 10,000 CVEs or fewer.
IBM i 7.3, 7.4, 7.5, and 7.6 could allow a local attacker to modify the BOOTP table due to improper authorization.
IBM i 7.3, 7.4, 7.5, and 7.6 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to cause a denial of service and obtain information due to an out-of-bounds read in the File Server.
IBM i 7.3, 7.4, 7.5, and 7.6 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to execute arbitrary script code due to improper validation of user-supplied input.
IBM i 7.3, 7.4, 7.5, and 7.6 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information or execute arbitrary code on the system due to improper data sanitization by the HTTP Server Administration web application.
IBM Guardium Data Protection 12.2 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to cause a denial of service due to a path traversal vulnerability.
IBM Guardium Data Protection 12.0, 12.1, and 12.2 could allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code due to a buffer overflow.
IBM Guardium Data Protection 12.0, 12.1, and 12.2 could allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code due to path traversal.
IBM Guardium Data Protection 12.0, 12.1, and 12.2 could allow a remote attacker to execute unauthorized SQL statements due to SQL injection.
IBM Guardium Data Protection 12.0, 12.1, and 12.2 is vulnerable to SQL injection. A remote unauthenticated 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 Guardium Data Protection 12.0, 12.1, and 12.2 could allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code due to a buffer overflow.
IBM Guardium Data Protection 12.0, 12.1, and 12.2 could allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code due to a stack-based buffer overflow.
IBM Guardium Data Protection 12.0, 12.1, and 12.2 is vulnerable to a buffer overrun in the TDS (Microsoft SQL Server) PRELOGIN packet decoder. A remote attacker who can send a specially crafted TDS PRELOGIN packet to a network monitored by an IBM Guardium Collector may cause a denial of service or potentially execute arbitrary code on the Collector appliance.
IBM DataPower Gateway 11.0.0.0 through 11.0.0.2 could allow a remote authenticated attacker to cause a denial of service due to improper memory allocation during key derivation.
IBM DataPower Gateway 10.5.0.0 through 10.5.0.22, 10.6.1 through 10.6.6, 10.6.0.0 through 10.6.0.10, and 11.0.0.0 through 11.0.0.2 could allow a remote attacker to cause a denial of service and obtain sensitive information due to a use-after-free.
IBM DataPower Gateway 10.5.0.0 through 10.5.0.22, 10.6.1 through 10.6.6, 10.6.0.0 through 10.6.0.10, and 11.0.0.0 through 11.0.0.2 could allow a remote attacker to cause a denial of service due to algorithmic complexity in linked-list traversal.
IBM WebSphere Application Server 8.5, and 9.0 and IBM WebSphere Application Server - Liberty 17.0.0.3 through 26.0.0.10 Liberty could allow a remote attacker to cause a denial of service caused by an insecure deserialization in the messaging service.
IBM DataPower Gateway 10.5.0.0 through 10.5.0.22, 10.6.1 through 10.6.6, 10.6.0.0 through 10.6.0.10, and 11.0.0.0 through 11.0.0.2 could allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code due to a heap-based buffer overflow.
IBM DataPower Gateway 10.5.0.0 through 10.5.0.22, 10.6.1 through 10.6.6, 10.6.0.0 through 10.6.0.10, and 11.0.0.0 through 11.0.0.2 is vulnerable to buffer overflow.
IBM DataPower Gateway 10.5.0.0 through 10.5.0.22, 10.6.1 through 10.6.6, 10.6.0.0 through 10.6.0.10, and 11.0.0.0 through 11.0.0.2 vulnerable to buffer overflow.
IBM DataPower Gateway 10.5.0.0 through 10.5.0.22, 10.6.1 through 10.6.6, 10.6.0.0 through 10.6.0.10, and 11.0.0.0 through 11.0.0.2 could allow a remote attacker to bypass authentication by forging valid JSON Web Signatures due to improper verification of cryptographic signatures.