ghsa-cc8w-fc65-v92f
Vulnerability from github
Published
2022-05-17 05:50
Modified
2022-05-17 05:50
Details
Integer overflow in httpAdapter.c in httpAdapter in SBLIM SFCB 1.3.4 through 1.3.7, when the configuration sets httpMaxContentLength to a zero value, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (heap memory corruption) or possibly execute arbitrary code via a large integer in the Content-Length HTTP header, aka bug #3001915. NOTE: some of these details are obtained from third party information.
{ "affected": [], "aliases": [ "CVE-2010-2054" ], "database_specific": { "cwe_ids": [], "github_reviewed": false, "github_reviewed_at": null, "nvd_published_at": "2010-06-15T14:30:00Z", "severity": "HIGH" }, "details": "Integer overflow in httpAdapter.c in httpAdapter in SBLIM SFCB 1.3.4 through 1.3.7, when the configuration sets httpMaxContentLength to a zero value, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (heap memory corruption) or possibly execute arbitrary code via a large integer in the Content-Length HTTP header, aka bug #3001915. NOTE: some of these details are obtained from third party information.", "id": "GHSA-cc8w-fc65-v92f", "modified": "2022-05-17T05:50:14Z", "published": "2022-05-17T05:50:14Z", "references": [ { "type": "ADVISORY", "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2010-2054" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://marc.info/?l=bugtraq\u0026m=127549079109192\u0026w=2" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://sblim.cvs.sourceforge.net/viewvc/sblim/sfcb/httpAdapter.c?r1=1.85\u0026r2=1.86" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/40018" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail\u0026aid=3001915\u0026group_id=128809\u0026atid=712784" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://www.vupen.com/english/advisories/2010/1312" } ], "schema_version": "1.4.0", "severity": [] }
Loading…
Loading…
Sightings
Author | Source | Type | Date |
---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
- Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.