Filtered by vendor Netapp
Subscribe
Filtered by product Clustered Data Ontap Antivirus Connector
Subscribe
Total
23 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v2 | CVSS v3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2019-1559 | 13 Canonical, Debian, F5 and 10 more | 90 Ubuntu Linux, Debian Linux, Big-ip Access Policy Manager and 87 more | 2026-06-17 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 5.9 MEDIUM |
| If an application encounters a fatal protocol error and then calls SSL_shutdown() twice (once to send a close_notify, and once to receive one) then OpenSSL can respond differently to the calling application if a 0 byte record is received with invalid padding compared to if a 0 byte record is received with an invalid MAC. If the application then behaves differently based on that in a way that is detectable to the remote peer, then this amounts to a padding oracle that could be used to decrypt data. In order for this to be exploitable "non-stitched" ciphersuites must be in use. Stitched ciphersuites are optimised implementations of certain commonly used ciphersuites. Also the application must call SSL_shutdown() twice even if a protocol error has occurred (applications should not do this but some do anyway). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2r (Affected 1.0.2-1.0.2q). | |||||
| CVE-2016-8610 | 7 Debian, Fujitsu, Netapp and 4 more | 53 Debian Linux, M10-1, M10-1 Firmware and 50 more | 2026-06-17 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| A denial of service flaw was found in OpenSSL 0.9.8, 1.0.1, 1.0.2 through 1.0.2h, and 1.1.0 in the way the TLS/SSL protocol defined processing of ALERT packets during a connection handshake. A remote attacker could use this flaw to make a TLS/SSL server consume an excessive amount of CPU and fail to accept connections from other clients. | |||||
| CVE-2015-8960 | 7 Apple, Google, Ietf and 4 more | 18 Safari, Chrome, Transport Layer Security and 15 more | 2026-06-17 | 6.8 MEDIUM | 8.1 HIGH |
| The TLS protocol 1.2 and earlier supports the rsa_fixed_dh, dss_fixed_dh, rsa_fixed_ecdh, and ecdsa_fixed_ecdh values for ClientCertificateType but does not directly document the ability to compute the master secret in certain situations with a client secret key and server public key but not a server secret key, which makes it easier for man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof TLS servers by leveraging knowledge of the secret key for an arbitrary installed client X.509 certificate, aka the "Key Compromise Impersonation (KCI)" issue. | |||||