ghsa-p4g3-m75g-v8cw
Vulnerability from github
Published
2022-05-01 23:47
Modified
2022-05-01 23:47
Details
Stack-based buffer overflow in the Web Server service in IBM Lotus Domino before 7.0.3 FP1, and 8.x before 8.0.1, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (daemon crash) or possibly execute arbitrary code via a long Accept-Language HTTP header.
{ "affected": [], "aliases": [ "CVE-2008-2240" ], "database_specific": { "cwe_ids": [ "CWE-119" ], "github_reviewed": false, "github_reviewed_at": null, "nvd_published_at": "2008-05-22T13:09:00Z", "severity": "HIGH" }, "details": "Stack-based buffer overflow in the Web Server service in IBM Lotus Domino before 7.0.3 FP1, and 8.x before 8.0.1, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (daemon crash) or possibly execute arbitrary code via a long Accept-Language HTTP header.", "id": "GHSA-p4g3-m75g-v8cw", "modified": "2022-05-01T23:47:59Z", "published": "2022-05-01T23:47:59Z", "references": [ { "type": "ADVISORY", "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2008-2240" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/42552" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/30310" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/30332" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://www-1.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg21303057" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://www.attrition.org/pipermail/vim/2008-May/001988.html" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://www.attrition.org/pipermail/vim/2008-May/001989.html" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://www.mwrinfosecurity.com/publications/mwri_ibm-lotus-domino-accept-language-stack-overflow_2008-05-20.pdf" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/29310" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://www.securitytracker.com/id?1020098" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "http://www.vupen.com/english/advisories/2008/1597" } ], "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.