Squirrelmail 4.0 uses the outdated MD5 hash algorithm for passwords.

IBM Data Risk Manager (iDNA) 2.0.6 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 184925.

A cryptographic weakness existed in the authentication protocol of Remote Desktop. This issue was addressed by implementing the Secure Remote Password authentication protocol. This issue is fixed in Apple Remote Desktop 3.9. An attacker may be able to capture cleartext passwords.

HCL OneTest Performance V9.5, V10.0, V10.1 uses basic authentication which is relatively weak. An attacker could potentially decode the encoded credentials.

AES OCB mode for 32-bit x86 platforms using the AES-NI assembly optimised implementation will not encrypt the entirety of the data under some circumstances. This could reveal sixteen bytes of data that was preexisting in the memory that wasn't written. In the special case of "in place" encryption, sixteen bytes of the plaintext would be revealed. Since OpenSSL does not support OCB based cipher suites for TLS and DTLS, they are both unaffected. Fixed in OpenSSL 3.0.5 (Affected 3.0.0-3.0.4). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1q (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1p).

Secure Encrypted Virtualization (SEV) on Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) Platform Security Processor (PSP; aka AMD Secure Processor or AMD-SP) 0.17 build 11 and earlier has an insecure cryptographic implementation.

A cryptographic flaw in Magento 2.1 prior to 2.1.18, Magento 2.2 prior to 2.2.9 and Magento 2.3 prior to 2.3.2 resulted in storage of sensitive information with an algorithm that is insufficiently resistant to brute force attacks.

IBM Security Guardium 10.0 Database Activity Monitor uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 132611.

BigProf AppGini 5.70 stores the passwords in the database using the MD5 hash.

Apache WSS4J before 1.6.17 and 2.0.x before 2.0.2 improperly leaks information about decryption failures when decrypting an encrypted key or message data, which makes it easier for remote attackers to recover the plaintext form of a symmetric key via a series of crafted messages. NOTE: this vulnerability exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2011-2487.

Rucky is a USB HID Rubber Ducky Launch Pad for Android. Versions 2.2 and earlier for release builds and versions 425 and earlier for nightly builds suffer from use of a weak cryptographic algorithm (RSA/ECB/PKCS1Padding). The issue will be patched in v2.3 for release builds and 426 onwards for nightly builds. As a workaround, one may disable an advance security feature if not required.

IBM UrbanCode Deploy (UCD) 7.1.1.2 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information.

The use of a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm in Philips Vue PACS versions 12.2.x.x and prior is an unnecessary risk that may result in the exposure of sensitive information.

IBM Spectrum Protect Plus 10.1.0 through 10.1.7 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 200258.

A vulnerability has been found in multiple revisions of Emerson Rosemount X-STREAM Gas Analyzer. The affected products utilize a weak encryption algorithm for storage of sensitive data, which may allow an attacker to more easily obtain credentials used for access.

Assuming a database breach, nonce reuse issues in GitLab 11.6+ allows an attacker to decrypt some of the database's encrypted content

IBM QRadar SIEM 7.3.0 to 7.3.3 Patch 8 and 7.4.0 to 7.4.3 GA uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 194448.

IBM Cloud Pak System 2.3.0 through 2.3.3.3 Interim Fix 1 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 197498.

IBM Security Verify Access Docker 10.0.0 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 197969

IBM Guardium Data Encryption (GDE) 3.0.0.3 and 4.0.0.4 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 195711.

In Moxa EDS-G516E Series firmware, Version 5.2 or lower, the affected products use a weak cryptographic algorithm, which may allow confidential information to be disclosed.

IBM Security Guardium Insights 2.0.2 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 184800.

IBM Sterling B2B Integrator Standard Edition 5.2.0.0 through 6.0.3.2 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 191814.

IBM Curam Social Program Management 7.0.9 and 7.0.10 uses MD5 algorithm for hashing token in a single instance which less safe than default SHA-256 cryptographic algorithm used throughout the Cúram application. IBM X-Force ID: 189156.

IBM Security Guardium Insights 2.0.2 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 184819.

IBM Spectrum Scale 5.0.0.0 through 5.0.4.4 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 178424.

IBM Cloud Pak for Security 1.3.0.1 (CP4S) uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms during negotiation could allow an attacker to decrypt sensitive information.

An issue was discovered in heinekingmedia StashCat through 1.7.5 for Android, through 0.0.80w for Web, and through 0.0.86 for Desktop. To encrypt messages, AES in CBC mode is used with a pseudo-random secret. This secret and the IV are generated with math.random() in previous versions and with CryptoJS.lib.WordArray.random() in newer versions, which uses math.random() internally. This is not cryptographically strong.