Уязвимость программной платформы Node.js, связанная с использованием памяти после её освобождения, позволяющая нарушителю получить доступ к конфиденциальным данным, нарушить их целостность, а также вызвать отказ в обслуживании

Уязвимость сетевого протокола HTTP/2 веб-сервера Apache Traffic Server, программной платформы Node.js, связанная с недостатком механизма контроля расхода ресурсов, позволяющая нарушителю вызвать отказ в обслуживании

Уязвимость компонента connection.c сетевого протокола HTTP/2 веб-сервера Apache Traffic Server, веб-сервера H2O, программной платформы Node.js, сетевого программного средства SwiftNIO, позволяющая нарушителю вызвать отказ в обслуживании

Уязвимость реализации сетевого протокола HTTP/2 сервера nginx, программной платформы Node.js, сетевого программного средства SwiftNIO, связанная с неконтролируемым расходом ресурсов, позволяющая нарушителю вызвать отказ в обслуживании

Уязвимость реализации сетевого протокола HTTP/2 операционных систем Windows, сервера nginx, сетевых программных средств netty, Envoy, SwiftNIO, программной платформы Node.js, позволяющая нарушителю вызвать отказ в обслуживании

Security update for boost

Security update for java-1_8_0-ibm

Security update for java-1_6_0-ibm

Security update for java-1_7_1-ibm

Security update for java-1_7_1-ibm

Security update for java-1_7_0-ibm

Low: rsync security update

inftrees.c in zlib 1.2.8 might allow context-dependent attackers to have unspecified impact by leveraging improper pointer arithmetic.

The DES and Triple DES ciphers, as used in the TLS, SSH, and IPSec protocols and other protocols and products, have a birthday bound of approximately four billion blocks, which makes it easier for remote attackers to obtain cleartext data via a birthday attack against a long-duration encrypted session, as demonstrated by an HTTPS session using Triple DES in CBC mode, aka a "Sweet32" attack.

Node.js before 10.24.0, 12.21.0, 14.16.0, and 15.10.0 is vulnerable to a denial of service attack when too many connection attempts with an 'unknownProtocol' are established. This leads to a leak of file descriptors. If a file descriptor limit is configured on the system, then the server is unable to accept new connections and prevent the process also from opening, e.g. a file. If no file descriptor limit is configured, then this lead to an excessive memory usage and cause the system to run out of memory.

Node.js < 12.22.9, < 14.18.3, < 16.13.2, and < 17.3.1 converts SANs (Subject Alternative Names) to a string format. It uses this string to check peer certificates against hostnames when validating connections. The string format was subject to an injection vulnerability when name constraints were used within a certificate chain, allowing the bypass of these name constraints.Versions of Node.js with the fix for this escape SANs containing the problematic characters in order to prevent the injection. This behavior can be reverted through the --security-revert command-line option.

Accepting arbitrary Subject Alternative Name (SAN) types, unless a PKI is specifically defined to use a particular SAN type, can result in bypassing name-constrained intermediates. Node.js < 12.22.9, < 14.18.3, < 16.13.2, and < 17.3.1 was accepting URI SAN types, which PKIs are often not defined to use. Additionally, when a protocol allows URI SANs, Node.js did not match the URI correctly.Versions of Node.js with the fix for this disable the URI SAN type when checking a certificate against a hostname. This behavior can be reverted through the --security-revert command-line option.

Node.js < 12.22.9, < 14.18.3, < 16.13.2, and < 17.3.1 did not handle multi-value Relative Distinguished Names correctly. Attackers could craft certificate subjects containing a single-value Relative Distinguished Name that would be interpreted as a multi-value Relative Distinguished Name, for example, in order to inject a Common Name that would allow bypassing the certificate subject verification.Affected versions of Node.js that do not accept multi-value Relative Distinguished Names and are thus not vulnerable to such attacks themselves. However, third-party code that uses node's ambiguous presentation of certificate subjects may be vulnerable.

Node.js < 12.22.9, < 14.18.3, < 16.13.2, and < 17.3.1 did not handle multi-value Relative Distinguished Names correctly. Attackers could craft certificate subjects containing a single-value Relative Distinguished Name that would be interpreted as a multi-value Relative Distinguished Name, for example, in order to inject a Common Name that would allow bypassing the certificate subject verification.Affected versions of Node.js that do not accept multi-value Relative Distinguished Names and are thus not vulnerable to such attacks themselves. However, third-party code that uses node's ambiguous presentation of certificate subjects may be vulnerable.

Node.js < 12.22.9, < 14.18.3, < 16.13.2, and < 17.3.1 did not handle multi-value Relative Distinguished Names correctly. Attackers could craft certificate subjects containing a single-value Relative Distinguished Name that would be interpreted as a multi-value Relative Distinguished Name, for example, in order to inject a Common Name that would allow bypassing the certificate subject verification.Affected versions of Node.js that do not accept multi-value Relative Distinguished Names and are thus not vulnerable to such attacks themselves. However, third-party code that uses node's ambiguous presentation of certificate subjects may be vulnerable.