Filtered by vendor Redhat
Subscriptions
Filtered by product Openstack
Subscriptions
Total
718 CVE
CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
---|---|---|---|---|
CVE-2022-47951 | 3 Debian, Openstack, Redhat | 5 Debian Linux, Cinder, Glance and 2 more | 2024-11-21 | 5.7 Medium |
An issue was discovered in OpenStack Cinder before 19.1.2, 20.x before 20.0.2, and 21.0.0; Glance before 23.0.1, 24.x before 24.1.1, and 25.0.0; and Nova before 24.1.2, 25.x before 25.0.2, and 26.0.0. By supplying a specially created VMDK flat image that references a specific backing file path, an authenticated user may convince systems to return a copy of that file's contents from the server, resulting in unauthorized access to potentially sensitive data. | ||||
CVE-2022-47950 | 3 Debian, Openstack, Redhat | 3 Debian Linux, Swift, Openstack | 2024-11-21 | 6.5 Medium |
An issue was discovered in OpenStack Swift before 2.28.1, 2.29.x before 2.29.2, and 2.30.0. By supplying crafted XML files, an authenticated user may coerce the S3 API into returning arbitrary file contents from the host server, resulting in unauthorized read access to potentially sensitive data. This impacts both s3api deployments (Rocky or later), and swift3 deployments (Queens and earlier, no longer actively developed). | ||||
CVE-2022-44020 | 3 Fedoraproject, Opendev, Redhat | 4 Fedora, Sushy-tools, Virtualbmc and 1 more | 2024-11-21 | 5.5 Medium |
An issue was discovered in OpenStack Sushy-Tools through 0.21.0 and VirtualBMC through 2.2.2. Changing the boot device configuration with these packages removes password protection from the managed libvirt XML domain. NOTE: this only affects an "unsupported, production-like configuration." | ||||
CVE-2022-41725 | 2 Golang, Redhat | 19 Go, Ansible Automation Platform, Cert Manager and 16 more | 2024-11-21 | 7.5 High |
A denial of service is possible from excessive resource consumption in net/http and mime/multipart. Multipart form parsing with mime/multipart.Reader.ReadForm can consume largely unlimited amounts of memory and disk files. This also affects form parsing in the net/http package with the Request methods FormFile, FormValue, ParseMultipartForm, and PostFormValue. ReadForm takes a maxMemory parameter, and is documented as storing "up to maxMemory bytes +10MB (reserved for non-file parts) in memory". File parts which cannot be stored in memory are stored on disk in temporary files. The unconfigurable 10MB reserved for non-file parts is excessively large and can potentially open a denial of service vector on its own. However, ReadForm did not properly account for all memory consumed by a parsed form, such as map entry overhead, part names, and MIME headers, permitting a maliciously crafted form to consume well over 10MB. In addition, ReadForm contained no limit on the number of disk files created, permitting a relatively small request body to create a large number of disk temporary files. With fix, ReadForm now properly accounts for various forms of memory overhead, and should now stay within its documented limit of 10MB + maxMemory bytes of memory consumption. Users should still be aware that this limit is high and may still be hazardous. In addition, ReadForm now creates at most one on-disk temporary file, combining multiple form parts into a single temporary file. The mime/multipart.File interface type's documentation states, "If stored on disk, the File's underlying concrete type will be an *os.File.". This is no longer the case when a form contains more than one file part, due to this coalescing of parts into a single file. The previous behavior of using distinct files for each form part may be reenabled with the environment variable GODEBUG=multipartfiles=distinct. Users should be aware that multipart.ReadForm and the http.Request methods that call it do not limit the amount of disk consumed by temporary files. Callers can limit the size of form data with http.MaxBytesReader. | ||||
CVE-2022-41724 | 2 Golang, Redhat | 20 Go, Ansible Automation Platform, Cert Manager and 17 more | 2024-11-21 | 7.5 High |
Large handshake records may cause panics in crypto/tls. Both clients and servers may send large TLS handshake records which cause servers and clients, respectively, to panic when attempting to construct responses. This affects all TLS 1.3 clients, TLS 1.2 clients which explicitly enable session resumption (by setting Config.ClientSessionCache to a non-nil value), and TLS 1.3 servers which request client certificates (by setting Config.ClientAuth >= RequestClientCert). | ||||
CVE-2022-41723 | 2 Golang, Redhat | 22 Go, Hpack, Http2 and 19 more | 2024-11-21 | 7.5 High |
A maliciously crafted HTTP/2 stream could cause excessive CPU consumption in the HPACK decoder, sufficient to cause a denial of service from a small number of small requests. | ||||
CVE-2022-41717 | 3 Fedoraproject, Golang, Redhat | 25 Fedora, Go, Http2 and 22 more | 2024-11-21 | 5.3 Medium |
An attacker can cause excessive memory growth in a Go server accepting HTTP/2 requests. HTTP/2 server connections contain a cache of HTTP header keys sent by the client. While the total number of entries in this cache is capped, an attacker sending very large keys can cause the server to allocate approximately 64 MiB per open connection. | ||||
CVE-2022-41715 | 2 Golang, Redhat | 24 Go, Acm, Ceph Storage and 21 more | 2024-11-21 | 7.5 High |
Programs which compile regular expressions from untrusted sources may be vulnerable to memory exhaustion or denial of service. The parsed regexp representation is linear in the size of the input, but in some cases the constant factor can be as high as 40,000, making relatively small regexps consume much larger amounts of memory. After fix, each regexp being parsed is limited to a 256 MB memory footprint. Regular expressions whose representation would use more space than that are rejected. Normal use of regular expressions is unaffected. | ||||
CVE-2022-3596 | 1 Redhat | 2 Openstack, Openstack Platform | 2024-11-21 | 7.5 High |
An information leak was found in OpenStack's undercloud. This flaw allows unauthenticated, remote attackers to inspect sensitive data after discovering the IP address of the undercloud, possibly leading to compromising private information, including administrator access credentials. | ||||
CVE-2022-3277 | 2 Openstack, Redhat | 3 Neutron, Openstack, Openstack Platform | 2024-11-21 | 6.5 Medium |
An uncontrolled resource consumption flaw was found in openstack-neutron. This flaw allows a remote authenticated user to query a list of security groups for an invalid project. This issue creates resources that are unconstrained by the user's quota. If a malicious user were to submit a significant number of requests, this could lead to a denial of service. | ||||
CVE-2022-3276 | 2 Puppet, Redhat | 2 Puppetlabs-mysql, Openstack | 2024-11-21 | 8.4 High |
Command injection is possible in the puppetlabs-mysql module prior to version 13.0.0. A malicious actor is able to exploit this vulnerability only if they are able to provide unsanitized input to the module. This condition is rare in most deployments of Puppet and Puppet Enterprise. | ||||
CVE-2022-3261 | 1 Redhat | 2 Openstack, Openstack Platform | 2024-11-21 | 4.4 Medium |
A flaw was found in OpenStack. Multiple components show plain-text passwords in /var/log/messages during the OpenStack overcloud update run, leading to a disclosure of sensitive information problem. | ||||
CVE-2022-3146 | 2 Openstack, Redhat | 3 Tripleo Ansible, Openstack, Openstack For Ibm Power | 2024-11-21 | 5.5 Medium |
A flaw was found in tripleo-ansible. Due to an insecure default configuration, the permissions of a sensitive file are not sufficiently restricted. This flaw allows a local attacker to use brute force to explore the relevant directory and discover the file. This issue leads to information disclosure of important configuration details from the OpenStack deployment. | ||||
CVE-2022-3101 | 2 Openstack, Redhat | 3 Tripleo Ansible, Openstack, Openstack For Ibm Power | 2024-11-21 | 5.5 Medium |
A flaw was found in tripleo-ansible. Due to an insecure default configuration, the permissions of a sensitive file are not sufficiently restricted. This flaw allows a local attacker to use brute force to explore the relevant directory and discover the file, leading to information disclosure of important configuration details from the OpenStack deployment. | ||||
CVE-2022-3100 | 2 Openstack, Redhat | 5 Barbican, Enterprise Linux Eus, Openstack and 2 more | 2024-11-21 | 5.9 Medium |
A flaw was found in the openstack-barbican component. This issue allows an access policy bypass via a query string when accessing the API. | ||||
CVE-2022-3064 | 2 Redhat, Yaml Project | 7 Enterprise Linux, Openshift, Openshift Devspaces and 4 more | 2024-11-21 | 7.5 High |
Parsing malicious or large YAML documents can consume excessive amounts of CPU or memory. | ||||
CVE-2022-38065 | 1 Redhat | 1 Openstack | 2024-11-21 | 8.8 High |
A privilege escalation vulnerability exists in the oslo.privsep functionality of OpenStack git master 05194e7618 and prior. Overly permissive functionality within tools leveraging this library within a container can lead increased privileges. | ||||
CVE-2022-38060 | 2 Openstack, Redhat | 2 Kolla, Openstack | 2024-11-21 | 7.8 High |
A privilege escalation vulnerability exists in the sudo functionality of OpenStack Kolla git master 05194e7618. A misconfiguration in /etc/sudoers within a container can lead to increased privileges. | ||||
CVE-2022-37394 | 2 Openstack, Redhat | 2 Nova, Openstack | 2024-11-21 | 3.3 Low |
An issue was discovered in OpenStack Nova before 23.2.2, 24.x before 24.1.2, and 25.x before 25.0.2. By creating a neutron port with the direct vnic_type, creating an instance bound to that port, and then changing the vnic_type of the bound port to macvtap, an authenticated user may cause the compute service to fail to restart, resulting in a possible denial of service. Only Nova deployments configured with SR-IOV are affected. | ||||
CVE-2022-37026 | 2 Erlang, Redhat | 2 Erlang\/otp, Openstack | 2024-11-21 | 9.8 Critical |
In Erlang/OTP before 23.3.4.15, 24.x before 24.3.4.2, and 25.x before 25.0.2, there is a Client Authentication Bypass in certain client-certification situations for SSL, TLS, and DTLS. |