GHSA-9V2X-X2QC-4CFG
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-02 06:19 – Updated: 2022-05-02 06:19
VLAI?
Details
GNU nano before 2.2.4 does not verify whether a file has been changed before it is overwritten in a file-save operation, which allows local user-assisted attackers to overwrite arbitrary files via a symlink attack on an attacker-owned file that is being edited by the victim.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2010-1160"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-59"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2010-04-16T19:30:00Z",
"severity": "LOW"
},
"details": "GNU nano before 2.2.4 does not verify whether a file has been changed before it is overwritten in a file-save operation, which allows local user-assisted attackers to overwrite arbitrary files via a symlink attack on an attacker-owned file that is being edited by the victim.",
"id": "GHSA-9v2x-x2qc-4cfg",
"modified": "2022-05-02T06:19:38Z",
"published": "2022-05-02T06:19:38Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2010-1160"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://drosenbe.blogspot.com/2010/03/nano-as-root.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/nano-devel/2010-04/msg00000.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/39444"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://svn.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/trunk/nano/ChangeLog?revision=4503\u0026root=nano\u0026view=markup"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2010/04/14/4"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securitytracker.com/id?1023891"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
Loading…
Loading…
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Loading…
Loading…