Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0.41

CPE Details

Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0.41
6.0.41
2015-02-17
17h30 +00:00
2015-02-17
21h24 +00:00
Alerte pour un CPE
Restez informé de toutes modifications pour un CPE spécifique.
Gestion des notifications

CPE Name: cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:6.0.41:*:*:*:*:*:*:*

Informations

Vendor

apache

Product

tomcat

Version

6.0.41

Related CVE

Open and find in CVE List

CVE ID Publié Description Score Gravité
CVE-2020-8022 2020-06-29 08h20 +00:00 A Incorrect Default Permissions vulnerability in the packaging of tomcat on SUSE Enterprise Storage 5, SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 12-SP2-BCL, SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 12-SP2-LTSS, SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 12-SP3-BCL, SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 12-SP3-LTSS, SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 12-SP4, SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 12-SP5, SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 15-LTSS, SUSE Linux Enterprise Server for SAP 12-SP2, SUSE Linux Enterprise Server for SAP 12-SP3, SUSE Linux Enterprise Server for SAP 15, SUSE OpenStack Cloud 7, SUSE OpenStack Cloud 8, SUSE OpenStack Cloud Crowbar 8 allows local attackers to escalate from group tomcat to root. This issue affects: SUSE Enterprise Storage 5 tomcat versions prior to 8.0.53-29.32.1. SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 12-SP2-BCL tomcat versions prior to 8.0.53-29.32.1. SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 12-SP2-LTSS tomcat versions prior to 8.0.53-29.32.1. SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 12-SP3-BCL tomcat versions prior to 8.0.53-29.32.1. SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 12-SP3-LTSS tomcat versions prior to 8.0.53-29.32.1. SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 12-SP4 tomcat versions prior to 9.0.35-3.39.1. SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 12-SP5 tomcat versions prior to 9.0.35-3.39.1. SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 15-LTSS tomcat versions prior to 9.0.35-3.57.3. SUSE Linux Enterprise Server for SAP 12-SP2 tomcat versions prior to 8.0.53-29.32.1. SUSE Linux Enterprise Server for SAP 12-SP3 tomcat versions prior to 8.0.53-29.32.1. SUSE Linux Enterprise Server for SAP 15 tomcat versions prior to 9.0.35-3.57.3. SUSE OpenStack Cloud 7 tomcat versions prior to 8.0.53-29.32.1. SUSE OpenStack Cloud 8 tomcat versions prior to 8.0.53-29.32.1. SUSE OpenStack Cloud Crowbar 8 tomcat versions prior to 8.0.53-29.32.1.
7.8
Haute
CVE-2016-6796 2017-08-11 02h00 +00:00 A malicious web application running on Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M9, 8.5.0 to 8.5.4, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.36, 7.0.0 to 7.0.70 and 6.0.0 to 6.0.45 was able to bypass a configured SecurityManager via manipulation of the configuration parameters for the JSP Servlet.
7.5
Haute
CVE-2016-6797 2017-08-10 22h00 +00:00 The ResourceLinkFactory implementation in Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M9, 8.5.0 to 8.5.4, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.36, 7.0.0 to 7.0.70 and 6.0.0 to 6.0.45 did not limit web application access to global JNDI resources to those resources explicitly linked to the web application. Therefore, it was possible for a web application to access any global JNDI resource whether an explicit ResourceLink had been configured or not.
7.5
Haute
CVE-2016-0762 2017-08-10 16h00 +00:00 The Realm implementations in Apache Tomcat versions 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M9, 8.5.0 to 8.5.4, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.36, 7.0.0 to 7.0.70 and 6.0.0 to 6.0.45 did not process the supplied password if the supplied user name did not exist. This made a timing attack possible to determine valid user names. Note that the default configuration includes the LockOutRealm which makes exploitation of this vulnerability harder.
5.9
Moyen
CVE-2016-5018 2017-08-10 16h00 +00:00 In Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M9, 8.5.0 to 8.5.4, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.36, 7.0.0 to 7.0.70 and 6.0.0 to 6.0.45 a malicious web application was able to bypass a configured SecurityManager via a Tomcat utility method that was accessible to web applications.
9.1
Critique
CVE-2016-6794 2017-08-10 16h00 +00:00 When a SecurityManager is configured, a web application's ability to read system properties should be controlled by the SecurityManager. In Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M9, 8.5.0 to 8.5.4, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.36, 7.0.0 to 7.0.70, 6.0.0 to 6.0.45 the system property replacement feature for configuration files could be used by a malicious web application to bypass the SecurityManager and read system properties that should not be visible.
5.3
Moyen
CVE-2017-5647 2017-04-17 14h00 +00:00 A bug in the handling of the pipelined requests in Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M18, 8.5.0 to 8.5.12, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.42, 7.0.0 to 7.0.76, and 6.0.0 to 6.0.52, when send file was used, results in the pipelined request being lost when send file processing of the previous request completed. This could result in responses appearing to be sent for the wrong request. For example, a user agent that sent requests A, B and C could see the correct response for request A, the response for request C for request B and no response for request C.
7.5
Haute
CVE-2016-8735 2017-04-06 21h00 +00:00 Remote code execution is possible with Apache Tomcat before 6.0.48, 7.x before 7.0.73, 8.x before 8.0.39, 8.5.x before 8.5.7, and 9.x before 9.0.0.M12 if JmxRemoteLifecycleListener is used and an attacker can reach JMX ports. The issue exists because this listener wasn't updated for consistency with the CVE-2016-3427 Oracle patch that affected credential types.
9.8
Critique
CVE-2016-6816 2017-03-20 17h00 +00:00 The code in Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M11, 8.5.0 to 8.5.6, 8.0.0.RC1 to 8.0.38, 7.0.0 to 7.0.72, and 6.0.0 to 6.0.47 that parsed the HTTP request line permitted invalid characters. This could be exploited, in conjunction with a proxy that also permitted the invalid characters but with a different interpretation, to inject data into the HTTP response. By manipulating the HTTP response the attacker could poison a web-cache, perform an XSS attack and/or obtain sensitive information from requests other then their own.
7.1
Haute
CVE-2016-5388 2016-07-18 23h00 +00:00 Apache Tomcat 7.x through 7.0.70 and 8.x through 8.5.4, when the CGI Servlet is enabled, follows RFC 3875 section 4.1.18 and therefore does not protect applications from the presence of untrusted client data in the HTTP_PROXY environment variable, which might allow remote attackers to redirect an application's outbound HTTP traffic to an arbitrary proxy server via a crafted Proxy header in an HTTP request, aka an "httpoxy" issue. NOTE: the vendor states "A mitigation is planned for future releases of Tomcat, tracked as CVE-2016-5388"; in other words, this is not a CVE ID for a vulnerability.
8.1
Haute
CVE-2015-5174 2016-02-25 00h00 +00:00 Directory traversal vulnerability in RequestUtil.java in Apache Tomcat 6.x before 6.0.45, 7.x before 7.0.65, and 8.x before 8.0.27 allows remote authenticated users to bypass intended SecurityManager restrictions and list a parent directory via a /.. (slash dot dot) in a pathname used by a web application in a getResource, getResourceAsStream, or getResourcePaths call, as demonstrated by the $CATALINA_BASE/webapps directory.
4.3
Moyen
CVE-2015-5345 2016-02-25 00h00 +00:00 The Mapper component in Apache Tomcat 6.x before 6.0.45, 7.x before 7.0.68, 8.x before 8.0.30, and 9.x before 9.0.0.M2 processes redirects before considering security constraints and Filters, which allows remote attackers to determine the existence of a directory via a URL that lacks a trailing / (slash) character.
5.3
Moyen
CVE-2016-0706 2016-02-25 00h00 +00:00 Apache Tomcat 6.x before 6.0.45, 7.x before 7.0.68, 8.x before 8.0.31, and 9.x before 9.0.0.M2 does not place org.apache.catalina.manager.StatusManagerServlet on the org/apache/catalina/core/RestrictedServlets.properties list, which allows remote authenticated users to bypass intended SecurityManager restrictions and read arbitrary HTTP requests, and consequently discover session ID values, via a crafted web application.
4.3
Moyen
CVE-2016-0714 2016-02-25 00h00 +00:00 The session-persistence implementation in Apache Tomcat 6.x before 6.0.45, 7.x before 7.0.68, 8.x before 8.0.31, and 9.x before 9.0.0.M2 mishandles session attributes, which allows remote authenticated users to bypass intended SecurityManager restrictions and execute arbitrary code in a privileged context via a web application that places a crafted object in a session.
8.8
Haute
CVE-2014-0230 2015-06-07 21h00 +00:00 Apache Tomcat 6.x before 6.0.44, 7.x before 7.0.55, and 8.x before 8.0.9 does not properly handle cases where an HTTP response occurs before finishing the reading of an entire request body, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (thread consumption) via a series of aborted upload attempts.
7.8
CVE-2014-7810 2015-06-07 21h00 +00:00 The Expression Language (EL) implementation in Apache Tomcat 6.x before 6.0.44, 7.x before 7.0.58, and 8.x before 8.0.16 does not properly consider the possibility of an accessible interface implemented by an inaccessible class, which allows attackers to bypass a SecurityManager protection mechanism via a web application that leverages use of incorrect privileges during EL evaluation.
5
CVE-2014-0227 2015-02-15 23h00 +00:00 java/org/apache/coyote/http11/filters/ChunkedInputFilter.java in Apache Tomcat 6.x before 6.0.42, 7.x before 7.0.55, and 8.x before 8.0.9 does not properly handle attempts to continue reading data after an error has occurred, which allows remote attackers to conduct HTTP request smuggling attacks or cause a denial of service (resource consumption) by streaming data with malformed chunked transfer coding.
6.4
CVE-2013-4444 2014-09-11 23h00 +00:00 Unrestricted file upload vulnerability in Apache Tomcat 7.x before 7.0.40, in certain situations involving outdated java.io.File code and a custom JMX configuration, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code by uploading and accessing a JSP file.
6.8
CVE-2013-2185 2014-01-19 15h00 +00:00 The readObject method in the DiskFileItem class in Apache Tomcat and JBoss Web, as used in Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform 6.1.0 and Red Hat JBoss Portal 6.0.0, allows remote attackers to write to arbitrary files via a NULL byte in a file name in a serialized instance, a similar issue to CVE-2013-2186. NOTE: this issue is reportedly disputed by the Apache Tomcat team, although Red Hat considers it a vulnerability. The dispute appears to regard whether it is the responsibility of applications to avoid providing untrusted data to be deserialized, or whether this class should inherently protect against this issue
7.5