ghsa-h64v-56v4-2q6j
Vulnerability from github
Published
2022-05-17 02:00
Modified
2022-05-17 02:00
Details
Mutt does not verify that the smtps server hostname matches the domain name of the subject of an X.509 certificate, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof an SSL SMTP server via an arbitrary certificate, a different vulnerability than CVE-2009-3766.
{ "affected": [], "aliases": [ "CVE-2011-1429" ], "database_specific": { "cwe_ids": [ "CWE-20" ], "github_reviewed": false, "github_reviewed_at": null, "nvd_published_at": "2011-03-16T22:55:00Z", "severity": "MODERATE" }, "details": "Mutt does not verify that the smtps server hostname matches the domain name of the subject of an X.509 certificate, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof an SSL SMTP server via an arbitrary certificate, a different vulnerability than CVE-2009-3766.", "id": "GHSA-h64v-56v4-2q6j", "modified": "2022-05-17T02:00:34Z", "published": "2022-05-17T02:00:34Z", "references": [ { "type": "ADVISORY", "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2011-1429" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/66015" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/package-announce/2011-June/061353.html" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/package-announce/2011-June/061356.html" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/package-announce/2011-June/061461.html" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2011/Mar/87" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/44937" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://securityreason.com/securityalert/8143" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://www.redhat.com/support/errata/RHSA-2011-0959.html" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/46803" } ], "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.