Threats Tagged 'cwe-757'

Bulletin ID: 2026-135-AWS Scope: AWS Content Type: Important (requires attention) Publication Date: 10/14/2026 12:30 PM PDT Description: We identified CVE-2026-110310, an issue in Amazon S3 encryption client for .NET that could allow a remote user who can read encrypted objects in the S3 bucket can force a padding downgrade by altering the padding scheme recorded in an object's metadata to legacy PKCS#1 v1.5. Since this padding scheme is susceptible to the Bleichenbacher attack, the user can use a PKCS#1 v1.5 padding oracle to recover the RSA-wrapped envelope key and decrypt the object. Impacted versions: >= 2.1.0; 3.0.0 to 3.2.1; 4.0.0 to 4.0.2 Please refer to the article below for the most up-to-date and complete information related to this AWS Security Bulletin.

Bulletin ID: 2026-017-AWS Scope: AWS Content Type: Important (requires attention) Publication Date: 2026/04/20 12:45 PM PDT Description: AWS Encryption SDK (ESDK) for Python is a client-side encryption library. We identified CVE-2026-6550, which describes an issue with a key commitment policy bypass via shared key cache. Cryptographic algorithm downgrade in the caching layer of Amazon AWS Encryption SDK for Python before version 3.3.1 and before version 4.0.5 might allow an authenticated local threat actor to bypass key commitment policy enforcement via a shared key cache, resulting in ciphertext that can be decrypted to multiple different plaintexts. Impacted versions: - From 2.0 to 2.5.1 - From 3.0 to 3.3.0 - From 4.0 to 4.0.4 Please refer to the article below for the most up-to-date and complete information related to this AWS Security Bulletin.

CVE-2026-107279 is a high-severity vulnerability in AsyncHttpClient version 3.0.12 where the authentication algorithm incorrectly handles Digest qop=auth-int. This flaw causes the mutual-authentication verification to be skipped, allowing a peer that does not know the shared secret to be accepted as an authenticated server. The issue is fixed in version 3.0.13.

AsyncHttpClient versions prior to 3.0.13 and 2.16.1 contain a vulnerability where Digest authentication challenges with missing or empty nonces are incorrectly treated as Basic authentication challenges. This causes the client to resend credentials in cleartext using Basic authentication, exposing sensitive information. The issue affects both origin and proxy challenge parsers and has been fixed in versions 3.0.13 and 2.16.1.

Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature and Improper Certificate Validation in the OPC UA driver of Apache PLC4X (PLC4J) allows an attacker in a network position between client and server to impersonate the OPC UA server and to read, forge or modify secure-channel traffic, including user credential ssent by the client. The defect manifests differently depending on the version: - In 0.9.0 through 0.11.0 a failed message-signature check is only logged and never enforced, and there is no mechanism to verify the server certificate: it is taken from the unauthenticated GetEndpoints discovery response and used to encrypt the user's password. - In 0.12.0 through 0.13.1 the signature check is inverted (valid signatures are rejected, invalid ones accepted), and server certificates are accepted without a trust anchor by default. - In all affected versions the default security policy is None. Starting with 0.12.0 the driver additionally continues silently at a weaker security policy than the one configured, and starting with 0.13.0 endpoint selection prefers the weakest matching endpoint. Users checking only for one of these mechanisms may wrongly conclude they are unaffected. This issue affects Apache PLC4X: from 0.9.0 before 1.0.0. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 1.0.0, which fixes the issue. Version 1.0.0 verifies message signatures correctly, refuses to connect unless the server certificate can be verified against a configured trust store or pinned certificate, defaults to Basic256Sha256 with SignAndEncrypt, and fails the connection if the negotiated security policy is weaker than the configured one.

WeenyGenius, a computer lab management system by Howyar Technologies, has a Use of Insecure Protocol vulnerability. Due to the reliance on ZMTP Null mode, unauthenticated attackers on the same network can capture packets to leak transmitted data, or perform replay attacks with forged commands to disrupt classroom operations.

CVE-2026-59293 is a medium severity vulnerability in Spring Integration where the jCIFS client may negotiate down to the less secure SMB1/CIFS protocol if the application does not explicitly set smbMinVersion. SMB1 lacks mandatory signing and encryption, making it vulnerable to NTLM relay attacks and content tampering via man-in-the-middle. This affects specific versions of Spring Integration including 6.4.0 through 6.4.12, 6.5.0 through 6.5.10, 7.0.0 through 7.0.5, and exactly 7.1.0. No official patch or remediation guidance is currently documented.

Net::OAuth versions before 0.33 for Perl contain a vulnerability where the signature verification algorithm is chosen by the sender, allowing signature forgery. This improper verification of cryptographic signatures can enable attackers to forge requests by exploiting the way HMAC signatures are validated against a placeholder key. The flaw affects versions prior to 0.33 and has a critical severity rating.

Net::OAuth::Client versions before 0.32 for Perl have a critical vulnerability that allows silent downgrade from OAuth 1.0a to the less secure OAuth 1.0 during the get_request_token process. This downgrade happens without warning when the service provider omits the oauth_callback_confirmed parameter, causing the oauth_verifier parameter to be dropped from the access token request. This enables an attacker to perform OAuth 1.0 session fixation attacks by linking a victim's provider account to a session controlled by the attacker.

An issue in MongoDB Server's intra-cluster connection setup could allow a party with suitable network access to influence which authentication mechanism is used when one replica set member connects to another. Under certain conditions, this could cause the cluster's shared internal credential to be transmitted in a less-protected form, potentially allowing that credential to be recovered. If recovered, the credential could be used to authenticate as the internal superuser to nodes in the deployment.