IBM Security Guardium 11.1 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 174852.

IBM WebSphere Application Server 8.5 and 9.0 could provide weaker than expected security for outbound TLS connections caused by a failure to honor user configuration. IBM X-Force ID: 274812.

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: 178423.

IBM Sterling Secure Proxy 6.0.1, 6.0.2, 2.4.3.2, and 3.4.3.2 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-ForceID: 201100.

IBM Cloud Orchestrator 2.4 through 2.4.0.5 and 2.5 through 2.5.0.9 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 162260.

IBM API Connect 2018.4.1.7 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 168510.

IBM API Connect V5.0.0.0 through 5.0.8.7iFix3 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 165958.

IBM Cloud CLI 0.6.0 through 0.16.1 windows installers are signed using SHA1 certificate. An attacker might be able to exploit the weak algorithm to generate a installer with malicious software inside. IBM X-Force ID: 162773.

IBM Security Secret Server 10.7 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 170045.

IBM Security Directory Server 6.4.0 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 165813.

IBM OpenPages with Watson 8.3 and 9.0 could provide weaker than expected security in storage of encrypted data with AES encryption and CBC mode. If an authenticated remote attacker with access to the database or a local attacker with access to server files could extract the encrypted data values they could exploit this weaker algorithm to use additional cryptographic methods to possibly extract the encrypted data.

IBM Runtime Environment, Java Technology Edition IBMJCEPlus and JSSE 8.0.7.0 through 8.0.7.11 components could expose sensitive information using a combination of flaws and configurations. IBM X-Force ID: 253188.

IBM WebSphere Application Server Liberty 17.0.0.3 through 24.0.0.2 could provide weaker than expected security for outbound TLS connections caused by a failure to honor user configuration. IBM X-Force ID: 274711.

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: 184812.

IBM Security Guardium Insights 2.0.1 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 174405.

IBM AIX 7.2, 7.3, VIOS 3.1's OpenSSH implementation could allow a non-privileged local user to access files outside of those allowed due to improper access controls. IBM X-Force ID: 263476.

IBM Aspera Faspex 5.0.0 through 5.0.7 could allow a local user to obtain sensitive information due to improper encryption of certain data.

IBM Aspera Faspex 5.0.0 through 5.0.7 could allow a local user to obtain sensitive information due to improper encryption of certain data. IBM X-Force ID: 259671.

IBM WebSphere Application Server 8.5 and 9.0 could provide weaker than expected security, caused by the improper encoding in a local configuration file. IBM X-Force ID: 258637.

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 Security Guardium 11.2 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information. IBM X-Force ID: 196280.

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.

A Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm vulnerability in the TLS/SSL server of Juniper Networks Junos Space allows the use of static key ciphers (ssl-static-key-ciphers), reducing the confidentiality of on-path traffic communicated across the connection. These ciphers also do not support Perfect Forward Secrecy (PFS), affecting the long-term confidentiality of encrypted communications.This issue affects all versions of Junos Space before 24.1R5.

The ElGamal implementation in Libgcrypt before 1.9.4 allows plaintext recovery because, during interaction between two cryptographic libraries, a certain dangerous combination of the prime defined by the receiver's public key, the generator defined by the receiver's public key, and the sender's ephemeral exponents can lead to a cross-configuration attack against OpenPGP.

The implementations of PKCS#1 v1.5 key transport mechanism for XMLEncryption in JBossWS and Apache WSS4J before 1.6.5 is susceptible to a Bleichenbacher attack.

In Charm 0.43, any two users can collude to achieve the ability to decrypt YCT14 data.

IBM Concert 1.0.0 through 2.1.0 uses weaker than expected cryptographic algorithms that could allow an attacker to decrypt highly sensitive information.

CloudLink 7.1.2 and all prior versions contain a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm vulnerability. An unauthenticated remote attacker could potentially exploit this vulnerability leading to some information disclosure.

The OpenSSL DSA signature algorithm has been shown to be vulnerable to a timing side channel attack. An attacker could use variations in the signing algorithm to recover the private key. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1a (Affected 1.1.1). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.0j (Affected 1.1.0-1.1.0i). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2q (Affected 1.0.2-1.0.2p).

There is a weak secure algorithm vulnerability in Huawei products. A weak secure algorithm is used in a module. Attackers can exploit this vulnerability by capturing and analyzing the messages between devices to obtain information. This can lead to information leak.Affected product versions include: IPS Module V500R005C00SPC100, V500R005C00SPC200; NGFW Module V500R005C00SPC100, V500R005C00SPC200; Secospace USG6300 V500R001C30SPC200, V500R001C30SPC600, V500R001C60SPC500, V500R005C00SPC100, V500R005C00SPC200; Secospace USG6500 V500R001C30SPC200, V500R001C30SPC600, V500R001C60SPC500, V500R005C00SPC100, V500R005C00SPC200; Secospace USG6600 V500R001C30SPC200, V500R001C30SPC600, V500R001C60SPC500, V500R005C00SPC100, V500R005C00SPC200; USG9500 V500R001C30SPC200, V500R001C30SPC600, V500R001C60SPC500, V500R005C00SPC100, V500R005C00SPC200.

RSA BSAFE Micro Edition Suite, versions prior to 4.0.11 (in 4.0.x) and prior to 4.1.6.1 (in 4.1.x) contains a Covert Timing Channel vulnerability during RSA decryption, also known as a Bleichenbacher attack on RSA decryption. A remote attacker may be able to recover a RSA key.

RSA BSAFE SSL-J versions prior to 6.2.4 contain a Covert Timing Channel vulnerability during RSA decryption, also known as a Bleichenbacher attack on RSA decryption. A remote attacker may be able to recover a RSA key.

It was found that the GnuTLS implementation of HMAC-SHA-384 was vulnerable to a Lucky thirteen style attack. Remote attackers could use this flaw to conduct distinguishing attacks and plain text recovery attacks via statistical analysis of timing data using crafted packets.

It was found that the GnuTLS implementation of HMAC-SHA-256 was vulnerable to a Lucky thirteen style attack. Remote attackers could use this flaw to conduct distinguishing attacks and plaintext-recovery attacks via statistical analysis of timing data using crafted packets.

RSA BSAFE Crypto-J versions prior to 6.2.4 and RSA BSAFE SSL-J versions prior to 6.2.4 contain a Covert Timing Channel vulnerability during PKCS #1 unpadding operations, also known as a Bleichenbacher attack. A remote attacker may be able to recover a RSA key.

The provided HCL Launch Container images contain non-unique HTTPS certificates and a database encryption key. The fix provides directions and tools to replace the non-unique keys and certificates. This does not affect the standard installer packages.

The OpenSSL ECDSA signature algorithm has been shown to be vulnerable to a timing side channel attack. An attacker could use variations in the signing algorithm to recover the private key. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.0j (Affected 1.1.0-1.1.0i). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1a (Affected 1.1.1).

CS2 Network P2P through 3.x, as used in millions of Internet of Things devices, suffers from an information exposure flaw that exposes user session data to supernodes in the network, as demonstrated by passively eavesdropping on user video/audio streams, capturing credentials, and compromising devices.

Dell PowerProtect Data Domain, versions prior to 7.13.0.0, LTS 7.7.5.40, LTS 7.10.1.30 contain an weak cryptographic algorithm vulnerability. A remote unauthenticated attacker could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to man-in-the-middle attack that exposes sensitive session information.

Dell InsightIQ, Verion 5.0.0, contains a use of a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm vulnerability. An unauthenticated remote attacker could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to information disclosure.

Dell PowerScale OneFS versions 8.2.x through 9.7.0.2 contains a use of a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm vulnerability. A remote unauthenticated attacker could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to information disclosure.

Dell PowerScale OneFS, versions 8.2.2.x through 9.5.0.x contains a use of a broken cryptographic algorithm vulnerability. A remote unauthenticated attacker could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to information disclosure.

It was found that python-rsa is vulnerable to Bleichenbacher timing attacks. An attacker can use this flaw via the RSA decryption API to decrypt parts of the cipher text encrypted with RSA.

Bleichenbacher's attack on PKCS #1 v1.5 padding for RSA in Microchip Libraries for Applications 2018-11-26 All up to 2018-11-26. The vulnerability can allow one to use Bleichenbacher's oracle attack to decrypt an encrypted ciphertext by making successive queries to the server using the vulnerable library, resulting in remote information disclosure.

Bleichenbacher's attack on PKCS #1 v1.5 padding for RSA in STM32 cryptographic firmware library software expansion for STM32Cube (UM1924). The vulnerability can allow one to use Bleichenbacher's oracle attack to decrypt an encrypted ciphertext by making successive queries to the server using the vulnerable library, resulting in remote information disclosure.

Dell PowerScale OneFS, versions 9.2.0.x through 9.4.0.x contain an information vulnerability. A remote unauthenticated attacker may potentially exploit this vulnerability to cause data leak.

Dell PowerScale OneFS versions 8.2.2.x through 9.7.0.0 contain use of a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm vulnerability. An unprivileged network malicious attacker could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to data leaks.

Dell PowerScale OneFS, versions prior to 9.10.1.3 and versions 9.11.0.0 through 9.12.0.0, contains a use of a broken or risky cryptographic algorithm vulnerability. An unauthenticated attacker with remote access could potentially exploit this vulnerability, leading to Information disclosure.

The ElGamal implementation in Botan through 2.18.1, as used in Thunderbird and other products, allows plaintext recovery because, during interaction between two cryptographic libraries, a certain dangerous combination of the prime defined by the receiver's public key, the generator defined by the receiver's public key, and the sender's ephemeral exponents can lead to a cross-configuration attack against OpenPGP.

Apache James prior to release 3.6.1 is vulnerable to a buffering attack relying on the use of the STARTTLS command. This can result in Man-in -the-middle command injection attacks, leading potentially to leakage of sensible information.