ghsa-ww27-vpf9-hhf2
Vulnerability from github
Published
2022-05-01 17:52
Modified
2022-05-01 17:52
Details
Sylpheed 2.2.7 and earlier does not properly use the --status-fd argument when invoking GnuPG, which prevents Sylpheed from visually distinguishing between signed and unsigned portions of OpenPGP messages with multiple components, which allows remote attackers to forge the contents of a message without detection.
{ affected: [], aliases: [ "CVE-2007-1267", ], database_specific: { cwe_ids: [], github_reviewed: false, github_reviewed_at: null, nvd_published_at: "2007-03-06T20:19:00Z", severity: "MODERATE", }, details: "Sylpheed 2.2.7 and earlier does not properly use the --status-fd argument when invoking GnuPG, which prevents Sylpheed from visually distinguishing between signed and unsigned portions of OpenPGP messages with multiple components, which allows remote attackers to forge the contents of a message without detection.", id: "GHSA-ww27-vpf9-hhf2", modified: "2022-05-01T17:52:03Z", published: "2022-05-01T17:52:03Z", references: [ { type: "ADVISORY", url: "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2007-1267", }, { type: "WEB", url: "http://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-users/2007-March/030514.html", }, { type: "WEB", url: "http://secunia.com/advisories/24414", }, { type: "WEB", url: "http://securityreason.com/securityalert/2353", }, { type: "WEB", url: "http://www.coresecurity.com/?action=item&id=1687", }, { type: "WEB", url: "http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/461958/100/0/threaded", }, { type: "WEB", url: "http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/461958/30/7710/threaded", }, { type: "WEB", url: "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/22777", }, { type: "WEB", url: "http://www.securitytracker.com/id?1017727", }, { type: "WEB", url: "http://www.vupen.com/english/advisories/2007/0835", }, ], schema_version: "1.4.0", severity: [], }
Log in or create an account to share your comment.
Security Advisory comment format.
This schema specifies the format of a comment related to a security advisory.
Title of the comment
Description of the comment
Loading…
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.