cherrypy: new version

Уязвимость программного обеспечения SendMail SMTP Server , связанная с недостаточной проверкой подлинности данных, позволяющая нарушителю обойти механизм защиты и внедрить сообщения электронной почты с поддельным адресом MAIL FROM

ALPACA is an application layer protocol content confusion attack, exploiting TLS servers implementing different protocols but using compatible certificates, such as multi-domain or wildcard certificates. A MiTM attacker having access to victim's traffic at the TCP/IP layer can redirect traffic from one subdomain to another, resulting in a valid TLS session. This breaks the authentication of TLS and cross-protocol attacks may be possible where the behavior of one protocol service may compromise the other at the application layer.

sendmail through 8.17.2 allows SMTP smuggling in certain configurations. Remote attackers can use a published exploitation technique to inject e-mail messages with a spoofed MAIL FROM address, allowing bypass of an SPF protection mechanism. This occurs because sendmail supports . but some other popular e-mail servers do not. This is resolved in 8.18 and later versions with 'o' in srv_features.

Уязвимость библиотеки HTTP запросов языка программирования Python Requests, связанная с недостаточной защитой служебных данных, позволяющая нарушителю получить несанкционированный доступ к защищаемой информации

Requests is a HTTP library. Since Requests 2.3.0, Requests has been leaking Proxy-Authorization headers to destination servers when redirected to an HTTPS endpoint. This is a product of how we use `rebuild_proxies` to reattach the `Proxy-Authorization` header to requests. For HTTP connections sent through the tunnel, the proxy will identify the header in the request itself and remove it prior to forwarding to the destination server. However when sent over HTTPS, the `Proxy-Authorization` header must be sent in the CONNECT request as the proxy has no visibility into the tunneled request. This results in Requests forwarding proxy credentials to the destination server unintentionally, allowing a malicious actor to potentially exfiltrate sensitive information. This issue has been patched in version 2.31.0.

Уязвимость функции mstolfp() (libntp/mstolfp.c) программы мониторинга операций ntpq реализации протокола синхронизации времени NTP, позволяющая нарушителю выполнить произвольный код

Уязвимость функции mstolfp() (libntp/mstolfp.c) программы мониторинга операций ntpq реализации протокола синхронизации времени NTP, позволяющая нарушителю выполнить произвольный код

Уязвимость функции mstolfp() (libntp/mstolfp.c) программы мониторинга операций ntpq реализации протокола синхронизации времени NTP, позволяющая нарушителю выполнить произвольный код

Уязвимость функции mstolfp() (libntp/mstolfp.c) программы мониторинга операций ntpq реализации протокола синхронизации времени NTP, позволяющая нарушителю выполнить произвольный код

Уязвимость функции praecis_parse (ntpd/refclock_palisade.c) демона ntpd реализации протокола синхронизации времени NTP, позволяющая нарушителю вызвать отказ в обслуживании

mstolfp in libntp/mstolfp.c in NTP 4.2.8p15 has an out-of-bounds write in the cp

mstolfp in libntp/mstolfp.c in NTP 4.2.8p15 has an out-of-bounds write when adding a decimal point. An adversary may be able to attack a client ntpq process, but cannot attack ntpd.

mstolfp in libntp/mstolfp.c in NTP 4.2.8p15 has an out-of-bounds write when copying the trailing number. An adversary may be able to attack a client ntpq process, but cannot attack ntpd.

mstolfp in libntp/mstolfp.c in NTP 4.2.8p15 has an out-of-bounds write when adding a '\0' character. An adversary may be able to attack a client ntpq process, but cannot attack ntpd.

praecis_parse in ntpd/refclock_palisade.c in NTP 4.2.8p15 has an out-of-bounds write. Any attack method would be complex, e.g., with a manipulated GPS receiver.

Вытягивает libcairo

Уязвимость функции nltk.download() пакета библиотек для символьной и статистической обработки естественного языка NLTK, позволяющая нарушителю выполнить произвольный код

NLTK through 3.8.1 allows remote code execution if untrusted packages have pickled Python code, and the integrated data package download functionality is used. This affects, for example, averaged_perceptron_tagger and punkt.

Resource wordnet not found

NULL Pointer Dereference allows attackers to cause a denial of service (or application crash). This only applies when lxml is used together with libxml2 2.9.10 through 2.9.14. libxml2 2.9.9 and earlier are not affected. It allows triggering crashes through forged input data, given a vulnerable code sequence in the application. The vulnerability is caused by the iterwalk function (also used by the canonicalize function). Such code shouldn't be in wide-spread use, given that parsing + iterwalk would usually be replaced with the more efficient iterparse function. However, an XML converter that serialises to C14N would also be vulnerable, for example, and there are legitimate use cases for this code sequence. If untrusted input is received (also remotely) and processed via iterwalk function, a crash can be triggered.

Уязвимость инструментов установки пакетов Python Packaging Authority, связанная с некорректным регулярным выражением, позволяющая нарушителю вызывать отказ в обслуживании

Уязвимость модуля package_index библиотеки упрощения упаковки проектов setuptools, связанная с неправильным контролем генерации кода, позволяющая нарушителю выполнять произвольные команды в системе

Python Packaging Authority (PyPA) setuptools before 65.5.1 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service via HTML in a crafted package or custom PackageIndex page. There is a Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) in package_index.py.

A vulnerability in the package_index module of pypa/setuptools versions up to 69.1.1 allows for remote code execution via its download functions. These functions, which are used to download packages from URLs provided by users or retrieved from package index servers, are susceptible to code injection. If these functions are exposed to user-controlled inputs, such as package URLs, they can execute arbitrary commands on the system. The issue is fixed in version 70.0.

Уязвимость корневых сертификатов e-Tugra пакета для проверки надежности сертификатов SSL Certifi, позволяющая нарушителю реализовать атаку типа «человек посередине»

Certifi is a curated collection of Root Certificates for validating the trustworthiness of SSL certificates while verifying the identity of TLS hosts. Certifi 2022.12.07 removes root certificates from "TrustCor" from the root store. These are in the process of being removed from Mozilla's trust store. TrustCor's root certificates are being removed pursuant to an investigation prompted by media reporting that TrustCor's ownership also operated a business that produced spyware. Conclusions of Mozilla's investigation can be found in the linked google group discussion.

Certifi is a curated collection of Root Certificates for validating the trustworthiness of SSL certificates while verifying the identity of TLS hosts. Certifi prior to version 2023.07.22 recognizes "e-Tugra" root certificates. e-Tugra's root certificates were subject to an investigation prompted by reporting of security issues in their systems. Certifi 2023.07.22 removes root certificates from "e-Tugra" from the root store.

Не стартует автоматически с systemd

Уязвимость функции DH_generate_key() библиотеки OpenSSL, позволяющая нарушителю вызвать отказ в обслуживании

Уязвимость функций PKCS12_parse(), PKCS12_unpack_p7data(), PKCS12_unpack_p7encdata(), PKCS12_unpack_authsafes() и PKCS12_newpass() библиотеки OpenSSL, позволяющая нарушителю вызвать отказ в обслуживании

Уязвимость криптографической библиотеки OpenSSL, связанная с ошибками освобождения ресурсов, позволяющая нарушителю вызвать отказ в обслуживании

Уязвимость функции SSL_free_buffers() криптографической библиотеки OpenSSL, позволяющая нарушителю выполнить произвольный код или вызвать отказ в обслуживании

Уязвимость функции SSL_select_next_proto инструментария для протоколов TLS и SSL OpenSSL, связанная с раскрытием информации, позволяющая нарушителю получить доступ к конфиденциальным данным, а также вызвать отказ в обслуживании

Уязвимость функций EC_GROUP_new_curve_GF2m(), EC_GROUP_new_from_params(), BN_GF2m_*() интерфейса Elliptic Curve API криптографической библиотеки OpenSSL, позволяющая нарушителю выполнить произвольный код

Issue summary: Generating excessively long X9.42 DH keys or checking excessively long X9.42 DH keys or parameters may be very slow. Impact summary: Applications that use the functions DH_generate_key() to generate an X9.42 DH key may experience long delays. Likewise, applications that use DH_check_pub_key(), DH_check_pub_key_ex() or EVP_PKEY_public_check() to check an X9.42 DH key or X9.42 DH parameters may experience long delays. Where the key or parameters that are being checked have been obtained from an untrusted source this may lead to a Denial of Service. While DH_check() performs all the necessary checks (as of CVE-2023-3817), DH_check_pub_key() doesn't make any of these checks, and is therefore vulnerable for excessively large P and Q parameters. Likewise, while DH_generate_key() performs a check for an excessively large P, it doesn't check for an excessively large Q. An application that calls DH_generate_key() or DH_check_pub_key() and supplies a key or parameters obtained from an untrusted source could be vulnerable to a Denial of Service attack. DH_generate_key() and DH_check_pub_key() are also called by a number of other OpenSSL functions. An application calling any of those other functions may similarly be affected. The other functions affected by this are DH_check_pub_key_ex(), EVP_PKEY_public_check(), and EVP_PKEY_generate(). Also vulnerable are the OpenSSL pkey command line application when using the "-pubcheck" option, as well as the OpenSSL genpkey command line application. The OpenSSL SSL/TLS implementation is not affected by this issue. The OpenSSL 3.0 and 3.1 FIPS providers are not affected by this issue.

Issue summary: Processing a maliciously formatted PKCS12 file may lead OpenSSL to crash leading to a potential Denial of Service attack Impact summary: Applications loading files in the PKCS12 format from untrusted sources might terminate abruptly. A file in PKCS12 format can contain certificates and keys and may come from an untrusted source. The PKCS12 specification allows certain fields to be NULL, but OpenSSL does not correctly check for this case. This can lead to a NULL pointer dereference that results in OpenSSL crashing. If an application processes PKCS12 files from an untrusted source using the OpenSSL APIs then that application will be vulnerable to this issue. OpenSSL APIs that are vulnerable to this are: PKCS12_parse(), PKCS12_unpack_p7data(), PKCS12_unpack_p7encdata(), PKCS12_unpack_authsafes() and PKCS12_newpass(). We have also fixed a similar issue in SMIME_write_PKCS7(). However since this function is related to writing data we do not consider it security significant. The FIPS modules in 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected by this issue.

Issue summary: Some non-default TLS server configurations can cause unbounded memory growth when processing TLSv1.3 sessions Impact summary: An attacker may exploit certain server configurations to trigger unbounded memory growth that would lead to a Denial of Service This problem can occur in TLSv1.3 if the non-default SSL_OP_NO_TICKET option is being used (but not if early_data support is also configured and the default anti-replay protection is in use). In this case, under certain conditions, the session cache can get into an incorrect state and it will fail to flush properly as it fills. The session cache will continue to grow in an unbounded manner. A malicious client could deliberately create the scenario for this failure to force a Denial of Service. It may also happen by accident in normal operation. This issue only affects TLS servers supporting TLSv1.3. It does not affect TLS clients. The FIPS modules in 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected by this issue. OpenSSL 1.0.2 is also not affected by this issue.

Issue summary: Calling the OpenSSL API function SSL_free_buffers may cause memory to be accessed that was previously freed in some situations Impact summary: A use after free can have a range of potential consequences such as the corruption of valid data, crashes or execution of arbitrary code. However, only applications that directly call the SSL_free_buffers function are affected by this issue. Applications that do not call this function are not vulnerable. Our investigations indicate that this function is rarely used by applications. The SSL_free_buffers function is used to free the internal OpenSSL buffer used when processing an incoming record from the network. The call is only expected to succeed if the buffer is not currently in use. However, two scenarios have been identified where the buffer is freed even when still in use. The first scenario occurs where a record header has been received from the network and processed by OpenSSL, but the full record body has not yet arrived. In this case calling SSL_free_buffers will succeed even though a record has only been partially processed and the buffer is still in use. The second scenario occurs where a full record containing application data has been received and processed by OpenSSL but the application has only read part of this data. Again a call to SSL_free_buffers will succeed even though the buffer is still in use. While these scenarios could occur accidentally during normal operation a malicious attacker could attempt to engineer a stituation where this occurs. We are not aware of this issue being actively exploited. The FIPS modules in 3.3, 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected by this issue.

Issue summary: Calling the OpenSSL API function SSL_select_next_proto with an empty supported client protocols buffer may cause a crash or memory contents to be sent to the peer. Impact summary: A buffer overread can have a range of potential consequences such as unexpected application beahviour or a crash. In particular this issue could result in up to 255 bytes of arbitrary private data from memory being sent to the peer leading to a loss of confidentiality. However, only applications that directly call the SSL_select_next_proto function with a 0 length list of supported client protocols are affected by this issue. This would normally never be a valid scenario and is typically not under attacker control but may occur by accident in the case of a configuration or programming error in the calling application. The OpenSSL API function SSL_select_next_proto is typically used by TLS applications that support ALPN (Application Layer Protocol Negotiation) or NPN (Next Protocol Negotiation). NPN is older, was never standardised and is deprecated in favour of ALPN. We believe that ALPN is significantly more widely deployed than NPN. The SSL_select_next_proto function accepts a list of protocols from the server and a list of protocols from the client and returns the first protocol that appears in the server list that also appears in the client list. In the case of no overlap between the two lists it returns the first item in the client list. In either case it will signal whether an overlap between the two lists was found. In the case where SSL_select_next_proto is called with a zero length client list it fails to notice this condition and returns the memory immediately following the client list pointer (and reports that there was no overlap in the lists). This function is typically called from a server side application callback for ALPN or a client side application callback for NPN. In the case of ALPN the list of protocols supplied by the client is guaranteed by libssl to never be zero in length. The list of server protocols comes from the application and should never normally be expected to be of zero length. In this case if the SSL_select_next_proto function has been called as expected (with the list supplied by the client passed in the client/client_len parameters), then the application will not be vulnerable to this issue. If the application has accidentally been configured with a zero length server list, and has accidentally passed that zero length server list in the client/client_len parameters, and has additionally failed to correctly handle a "no overlap" response (which would normally result in a handshake failure in ALPN) then it will be vulnerable to this problem. In the case of NPN, the protocol permits the client to opportunistically select a protocol when there is no overlap. OpenSSL returns the first client protocol in the no overlap case in support of this. The list of client protocols comes from the application and should never normally be expected to be of zero length. However if the SSL_select_next_proto function is accidentally called with a client_len of 0 then an invalid memory pointer will be returned instead. If the application uses this output as the opportunistic protocol then the loss of confidentiality will occur. This issue has been assessed as Low severity because applications are most likely to be vulnerable if they are using NPN instead of ALPN - but NPN is not widely used. It also requires an application configuration or programming error. Finally, this issue would not typically be under attacker control making active exploitation unlikely. The FIPS modules in 3.3, 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected by this issue. Due to the low severity of this issue we are not issuing new releases of OpenSSL at this time. The fix will be included in the next releases when they become available.

Issue summary: Use of the low-level GF(2^m) elliptic curve APIs with untrusted explicit values for the field polynomial can lead to out-of-bounds memory reads or writes. Impact summary: Out of bound memory writes can lead to an application crash or even a possibility of a remote code execution, however, in all the protocols involving Elliptic Curve Cryptography that we're aware of, either only "named curves" are supported, or, if explicit curve parameters are supported, they specify an X9.62 encoding of binary (GF(2^m)) curves that can't represent problematic input values. Thus the likelihood of existence of a vulnerable application is low. In particular, the X9.62 encoding is used for ECC keys in X.509 certificates, so problematic inputs cannot occur in the context of processing X.509 certificates. Any problematic use-cases would have to be using an "exotic" curve encoding. The affected APIs include: EC_GROUP_new_curve_GF2m(), EC_GROUP_new_from_params(), and various supporting BN_GF2m_*() functions. Applications working with "exotic" explicit binary (GF(2^m)) curve parameters, that make it possible to represent invalid field polynomials with a zero constant term, via the above or similar APIs, may terminate abruptly as a result of reading or writing outside of array bounds. Remote code execution cannot easily be ruled out. The FIPS modules in 3.3, 3.2, 3.1 and 3.0 are not affected by this issue.

Долго создается снимок текущей системы в timeshift Альт К 10.2

Уязвимость реализации сетевого протокола аутентификации Kerberos 5, связанная с выходом операции за границы буфера в памяти, позволяющая нарушителю оказать воздействие на конфиденциальность и доступность защищаемой информации

Уязвимость реализации сетевого протокола аутентификации Kerberos 5, связанная с недостаточной проверкой входных данных, позволяющая нарушителю получить несанкционированный доступ к токену-оболочки GSS krb5

In MIT Kerberos 5 (aka krb5) before 1.21.3, an attacker can modify the plaintext Extra Count field of a confidential GSS krb5 wrap token, causing the unwrapped token to appear truncated to the application.

In MIT Kerberos 5 (aka krb5) before 1.21.3, an attacker can cause invalid memory reads during GSS message token handling by sending message tokens with invalid length fields.

List index out of range при запуске usbip-gui

Подключение к доступному USB-устройству работает, только при запуске от root

Уязвимость переменных среды PL/Perl системы управления базами данных PostgreSQL, позволяющая нарушителю выполнить произвольный код

Уязвимость команд SET ROLE, SET SESSION системы управления базами данных PostgreSQL, позволяющая нарушителю повысить свои привилегии и получить доступ к защищаемой информации

Уязвимость компонента libpq системы управления базами данных PostgreSQL, позволяющая нарушителю обойти существующие ограничения безопасности и выполнить атаку типа «человек посередине»

Уязвимость политики безопасности таблиц с защитой строк CREATE POLICY системы управления базами данных PostgreSQL, позволяющая нарушителю выполнить произвольные команды

Incomplete tracking in PostgreSQL of tables with row security allows a reused query to view or change different rows from those intended. CVE-2023-2455 and CVE-2016-2193 fixed most interaction between row security and user ID changes. They missed cases where a subquery, WITH query, security invoker view, or SQL-language function references a table with a row-level security policy. This has the same consequences as the two earlier CVEs. That is to say, it leads to potentially incorrect policies being applied in cases where role-specific policies are used and a given query is planned under one role and then executed under other roles. This scenario can happen under security definer functions or when a common user and query is planned initially and then re-used across multiple SET ROLEs. Applying an incorrect policy may permit a user to complete otherwise-forbidden reads and modifications. This affects only databases that have used CREATE POLICY to define a row security policy. An attacker must tailor an attack to a particular application's pattern of query plan reuse, user ID changes, and role-specific row security policies. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.

Client use of server error message in PostgreSQL allows a server not trusted under current SSL or GSS settings to furnish arbitrary non-NUL bytes to the libpq application. For example, a man-in-the-middle attacker could send a long error message that a human or screen-scraper user of psql mistakes for valid query results. This is probably not a concern for clients where the user interface unambiguously indicates the boundary between one error message and other text. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.

Incorrect privilege assignment in PostgreSQL allows a less-privileged application user to view or change different rows from those intended. An attack requires the application to use SET ROLE, SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION, or an equivalent feature. The problem arises when an application query uses parameters from the attacker or conveys query results to the attacker. If that query reacts to current_setting('role') or the current user ID, it may modify or return data as though the session had not used SET ROLE or SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION. The attacker does not control which incorrect user ID applies. Query text from less-privileged sources is not a concern here, because SET ROLE and SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION are not sandboxes for unvetted queries. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.

Incorrect control of environment variables in PostgreSQL PL/Perl allows an unprivileged database user to change sensitive process environment variables (e.g. PATH). That often suffices to enable arbitrary code execution, even if the attacker lacks a database server operating system user. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.

Уязвимость переменных среды PL/Perl системы управления базами данных PostgreSQL, позволяющая нарушителю выполнить произвольный код

Уязвимость команд SET ROLE, SET SESSION системы управления базами данных PostgreSQL, позволяющая нарушителю повысить свои привилегии и получить доступ к защищаемой информации

Уязвимость компонента libpq системы управления базами данных PostgreSQL, позволяющая нарушителю обойти существующие ограничения безопасности и выполнить атаку типа «человек посередине»

Уязвимость политики безопасности таблиц с защитой строк CREATE POLICY системы управления базами данных PostgreSQL, позволяющая нарушителю выполнить произвольные команды

Incomplete tracking in PostgreSQL of tables with row security allows a reused query to view or change different rows from those intended. CVE-2023-2455 and CVE-2016-2193 fixed most interaction between row security and user ID changes. They missed cases where a subquery, WITH query, security invoker view, or SQL-language function references a table with a row-level security policy. This has the same consequences as the two earlier CVEs. That is to say, it leads to potentially incorrect policies being applied in cases where role-specific policies are used and a given query is planned under one role and then executed under other roles. This scenario can happen under security definer functions or when a common user and query is planned initially and then re-used across multiple SET ROLEs. Applying an incorrect policy may permit a user to complete otherwise-forbidden reads and modifications. This affects only databases that have used CREATE POLICY to define a row security policy. An attacker must tailor an attack to a particular application's pattern of query plan reuse, user ID changes, and role-specific row security policies. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.

Client use of server error message in PostgreSQL allows a server not trusted under current SSL or GSS settings to furnish arbitrary non-NUL bytes to the libpq application. For example, a man-in-the-middle attacker could send a long error message that a human or screen-scraper user of psql mistakes for valid query results. This is probably not a concern for clients where the user interface unambiguously indicates the boundary between one error message and other text. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.

Incorrect privilege assignment in PostgreSQL allows a less-privileged application user to view or change different rows from those intended. An attack requires the application to use SET ROLE, SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION, or an equivalent feature. The problem arises when an application query uses parameters from the attacker or conveys query results to the attacker. If that query reacts to current_setting('role') or the current user ID, it may modify or return data as though the session had not used SET ROLE or SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION. The attacker does not control which incorrect user ID applies. Query text from less-privileged sources is not a concern here, because SET ROLE and SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION are not sandboxes for unvetted queries. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.

Incorrect control of environment variables in PostgreSQL PL/Perl allows an unprivileged database user to change sensitive process environment variables (e.g. PATH). That often suffices to enable arbitrary code execution, even if the attacker lacks a database server operating system user. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.

Уязвимость переменных среды PL/Perl системы управления базами данных PostgreSQL, позволяющая нарушителю выполнить произвольный код

Уязвимость команд SET ROLE, SET SESSION системы управления базами данных PostgreSQL, позволяющая нарушителю повысить свои привилегии и получить доступ к защищаемой информации

Уязвимость компонента libpq системы управления базами данных PostgreSQL, позволяющая нарушителю обойти существующие ограничения безопасности и выполнить атаку типа «человек посередине»

Уязвимость политики безопасности таблиц с защитой строк CREATE POLICY системы управления базами данных PostgreSQL, позволяющая нарушителю выполнить произвольные команды

Incomplete tracking in PostgreSQL of tables with row security allows a reused query to view or change different rows from those intended. CVE-2023-2455 and CVE-2016-2193 fixed most interaction between row security and user ID changes. They missed cases where a subquery, WITH query, security invoker view, or SQL-language function references a table with a row-level security policy. This has the same consequences as the two earlier CVEs. That is to say, it leads to potentially incorrect policies being applied in cases where role-specific policies are used and a given query is planned under one role and then executed under other roles. This scenario can happen under security definer functions or when a common user and query is planned initially and then re-used across multiple SET ROLEs. Applying an incorrect policy may permit a user to complete otherwise-forbidden reads and modifications. This affects only databases that have used CREATE POLICY to define a row security policy. An attacker must tailor an attack to a particular application's pattern of query plan reuse, user ID changes, and role-specific row security policies. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.

Client use of server error message in PostgreSQL allows a server not trusted under current SSL or GSS settings to furnish arbitrary non-NUL bytes to the libpq application. For example, a man-in-the-middle attacker could send a long error message that a human or screen-scraper user of psql mistakes for valid query results. This is probably not a concern for clients where the user interface unambiguously indicates the boundary between one error message and other text. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.

Incorrect privilege assignment in PostgreSQL allows a less-privileged application user to view or change different rows from those intended. An attack requires the application to use SET ROLE, SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION, or an equivalent feature. The problem arises when an application query uses parameters from the attacker or conveys query results to the attacker. If that query reacts to current_setting('role') or the current user ID, it may modify or return data as though the session had not used SET ROLE or SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION. The attacker does not control which incorrect user ID applies. Query text from less-privileged sources is not a concern here, because SET ROLE and SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION are not sandboxes for unvetted queries. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.

Incorrect control of environment variables in PostgreSQL PL/Perl allows an unprivileged database user to change sensitive process environment variables (e.g. PATH). That often suffices to enable arbitrary code execution, even if the attacker lacks a database server operating system user. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.

Уязвимость переменных среды PL/Perl системы управления базами данных PostgreSQL, позволяющая нарушителю выполнить произвольный код

Уязвимость команд SET ROLE, SET SESSION системы управления базами данных PostgreSQL, позволяющая нарушителю повысить свои привилегии и получить доступ к защищаемой информации

Уязвимость компонента libpq системы управления базами данных PostgreSQL, позволяющая нарушителю обойти существующие ограничения безопасности и выполнить атаку типа «человек посередине»

Уязвимость политики безопасности таблиц с защитой строк CREATE POLICY системы управления базами данных PostgreSQL, позволяющая нарушителю выполнить произвольные команды

Incomplete tracking in PostgreSQL of tables with row security allows a reused query to view or change different rows from those intended. CVE-2023-2455 and CVE-2016-2193 fixed most interaction between row security and user ID changes. They missed cases where a subquery, WITH query, security invoker view, or SQL-language function references a table with a row-level security policy. This has the same consequences as the two earlier CVEs. That is to say, it leads to potentially incorrect policies being applied in cases where role-specific policies are used and a given query is planned under one role and then executed under other roles. This scenario can happen under security definer functions or when a common user and query is planned initially and then re-used across multiple SET ROLEs. Applying an incorrect policy may permit a user to complete otherwise-forbidden reads and modifications. This affects only databases that have used CREATE POLICY to define a row security policy. An attacker must tailor an attack to a particular application's pattern of query plan reuse, user ID changes, and role-specific row security policies. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.

Client use of server error message in PostgreSQL allows a server not trusted under current SSL or GSS settings to furnish arbitrary non-NUL bytes to the libpq application. For example, a man-in-the-middle attacker could send a long error message that a human or screen-scraper user of psql mistakes for valid query results. This is probably not a concern for clients where the user interface unambiguously indicates the boundary between one error message and other text. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.

Incorrect privilege assignment in PostgreSQL allows a less-privileged application user to view or change different rows from those intended. An attack requires the application to use SET ROLE, SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION, or an equivalent feature. The problem arises when an application query uses parameters from the attacker or conveys query results to the attacker. If that query reacts to current_setting('role') or the current user ID, it may modify or return data as though the session had not used SET ROLE or SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION. The attacker does not control which incorrect user ID applies. Query text from less-privileged sources is not a concern here, because SET ROLE and SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION are not sandboxes for unvetted queries. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.

Incorrect control of environment variables in PostgreSQL PL/Perl allows an unprivileged database user to change sensitive process environment variables (e.g. PATH). That often suffices to enable arbitrary code execution, even if the attacker lacks a database server operating system user. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.

Уязвимость переменных среды PL/Perl системы управления базами данных PostgreSQL, позволяющая нарушителю выполнить произвольный код

Уязвимость команд SET ROLE, SET SESSION системы управления базами данных PostgreSQL, позволяющая нарушителю повысить свои привилегии и получить доступ к защищаемой информации

Уязвимость компонента libpq системы управления базами данных PostgreSQL, позволяющая нарушителю обойти существующие ограничения безопасности и выполнить атаку типа «человек посередине»

Уязвимость политики безопасности таблиц с защитой строк CREATE POLICY системы управления базами данных PostgreSQL, позволяющая нарушителю выполнить произвольные команды

Incomplete tracking in PostgreSQL of tables with row security allows a reused query to view or change different rows from those intended. CVE-2023-2455 and CVE-2016-2193 fixed most interaction between row security and user ID changes. They missed cases where a subquery, WITH query, security invoker view, or SQL-language function references a table with a row-level security policy. This has the same consequences as the two earlier CVEs. That is to say, it leads to potentially incorrect policies being applied in cases where role-specific policies are used and a given query is planned under one role and then executed under other roles. This scenario can happen under security definer functions or when a common user and query is planned initially and then re-used across multiple SET ROLEs. Applying an incorrect policy may permit a user to complete otherwise-forbidden reads and modifications. This affects only databases that have used CREATE POLICY to define a row security policy. An attacker must tailor an attack to a particular application's pattern of query plan reuse, user ID changes, and role-specific row security policies. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.

Client use of server error message in PostgreSQL allows a server not trusted under current SSL or GSS settings to furnish arbitrary non-NUL bytes to the libpq application. For example, a man-in-the-middle attacker could send a long error message that a human or screen-scraper user of psql mistakes for valid query results. This is probably not a concern for clients where the user interface unambiguously indicates the boundary between one error message and other text. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.

Incorrect privilege assignment in PostgreSQL allows a less-privileged application user to view or change different rows from those intended. An attack requires the application to use SET ROLE, SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION, or an equivalent feature. The problem arises when an application query uses parameters from the attacker or conveys query results to the attacker. If that query reacts to current_setting('role') or the current user ID, it may modify or return data as though the session had not used SET ROLE or SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION. The attacker does not control which incorrect user ID applies. Query text from less-privileged sources is not a concern here, because SET ROLE and SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION are not sandboxes for unvetted queries. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.

Incorrect control of environment variables in PostgreSQL PL/Perl allows an unprivileged database user to change sensitive process environment variables (e.g. PATH). That often suffices to enable arbitrary code execution, even if the attacker lacks a database server operating system user. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.

Уязвимость переменных среды PL/Perl системы управления базами данных PostgreSQL, позволяющая нарушителю выполнить произвольный код

Уязвимость команд SET ROLE, SET SESSION системы управления базами данных PostgreSQL, позволяющая нарушителю повысить свои привилегии и получить доступ к защищаемой информации

Уязвимость компонента libpq системы управления базами данных PostgreSQL, позволяющая нарушителю обойти существующие ограничения безопасности и выполнить атаку типа «человек посередине»

Уязвимость политики безопасности таблиц с защитой строк CREATE POLICY системы управления базами данных PostgreSQL, позволяющая нарушителю выполнить произвольные команды

Incomplete tracking in PostgreSQL of tables with row security allows a reused query to view or change different rows from those intended. CVE-2023-2455 and CVE-2016-2193 fixed most interaction between row security and user ID changes. They missed cases where a subquery, WITH query, security invoker view, or SQL-language function references a table with a row-level security policy. This has the same consequences as the two earlier CVEs. That is to say, it leads to potentially incorrect policies being applied in cases where role-specific policies are used and a given query is planned under one role and then executed under other roles. This scenario can happen under security definer functions or when a common user and query is planned initially and then re-used across multiple SET ROLEs. Applying an incorrect policy may permit a user to complete otherwise-forbidden reads and modifications. This affects only databases that have used CREATE POLICY to define a row security policy. An attacker must tailor an attack to a particular application's pattern of query plan reuse, user ID changes, and role-specific row security policies. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.

Client use of server error message in PostgreSQL allows a server not trusted under current SSL or GSS settings to furnish arbitrary non-NUL bytes to the libpq application. For example, a man-in-the-middle attacker could send a long error message that a human or screen-scraper user of psql mistakes for valid query results. This is probably not a concern for clients where the user interface unambiguously indicates the boundary between one error message and other text. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.

Incorrect privilege assignment in PostgreSQL allows a less-privileged application user to view or change different rows from those intended. An attack requires the application to use SET ROLE, SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION, or an equivalent feature. The problem arises when an application query uses parameters from the attacker or conveys query results to the attacker. If that query reacts to current_setting('role') or the current user ID, it may modify or return data as though the session had not used SET ROLE or SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION. The attacker does not control which incorrect user ID applies. Query text from less-privileged sources is not a concern here, because SET ROLE and SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION are not sandboxes for unvetted queries. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.

Incorrect control of environment variables in PostgreSQL PL/Perl allows an unprivileged database user to change sensitive process environment variables (e.g. PATH). That often suffices to enable arbitrary code execution, even if the attacker lacks a database server operating system user. Versions before PostgreSQL 17.1, 16.5, 15.9, 14.14, 13.17, and 12.21 are affected.