Filtered by vendor Pulsesecure
Subscriptions
Total
97 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2018-5299 | 1 Pulsesecure | 2 Pulse Connect Secure, Pulse Policy Secure | 2020-08-24 | N/A |
| A stack-based Buffer Overflow Vulnerability exists in the web server in Pulse Secure Pulse Connect Secure (PCS) before 8.3R4 and Pulse Policy Secure (PPS) before 5.4R4, leading to memory corruption and possibly remote code execution. | ||||
| CVE-2018-20307 | 1 Pulsesecure | 1 Virtual Traffic Manager | 2020-07-14 | 4.3 Medium |
| Pulse Secure Virtual Traffic Manager 9.9 versions prior to 9.9r2 and 10.4r1 allow a remote authenticated user to obtain sensitive historical activity information by leveraging incorrect permission validation. | ||||
| CVE-2018-15726 | 1 Pulsesecure | 1 Pulse Secure Desktop Client | 2020-05-11 | N/A |
| The Pulse Secure Desktop (macOS) 5.3RX before 5.3R5 and 9.0R1 has a Privilege Escalation Vulnerability. | ||||
| CVE-2018-15749 | 1 Pulsesecure | 1 Pulse Secure Desktop Client | 2020-05-11 | N/A |
| The Pulse Secure Desktop (macOS) 5.3RX before 5.3R5 and 9.0R1 has a Format String Vulnerability. | ||||
| CVE-2018-15865 | 1 Pulsesecure | 1 Pulse Secure Desktop Client | 2020-05-11 | N/A |
| The Pulse Secure Desktop (macOS) has a Privilege Escalation Vulnerability. | ||||
| CVE-2018-20193 | 1 Pulsesecure | 1 Secure Access Series Ssl Vpn Sa-4000 | 2019-10-03 | N/A |
| Certain Secure Access SA Series SSL VPN products (originally developed by Juniper Networks but now sold and supported by Pulse Secure, LLC) allow privilege escalation, as demonstrated by Secure Access SSL VPN SA-4000 5.1R5 (build 9627) 4.2 Release (build 7631). This occurs because appropriate controls are not performed. Specifically, it is possible for a readonly user to change the administrator user password by making a local copy of the /dana-admin/user/update.cgi page, changing the "user" value, and saving the changes. | ||||
| CVE-2018-16261 | 1 Pulsesecure | 1 Pulse Secure Desktop Client | 2019-10-03 | N/A |
| In Pulse Secure Pulse Desktop Client 5.3RX before 5.3R5 and 9.0R1, there is a Privilege Escalation Vulnerability with Dynamic Certificate Trust. | ||||
| CVE-2018-9849 | 1 Pulsesecure | 1 Pulse Connect Secure | 2019-10-03 | N/A |
| Pulse Secure Pulse Connect Secure 8.1.x before 8.1R14, 8.2.x before 8.2R11, and 8.3.x before 8.3R5 do not properly process nested XML entities, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption and memory errors) via a crafted XML document. | ||||
| CVE-2018-20306 | 1 Pulsesecure | 1 Virtual Traffic Manager | 2019-01-08 | N/A |
| A stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in the web administration user interface of Pulse Secure Virtual Traffic Manager may allow a remote authenticated attacker to inject web script or HTML via a crafted website and steal sensitive data and credentials. Affected releases are Pulse Secure Virtual Traffic Manager 9.9 versions prior to 9.9r2 and 10.4r1. | ||||
| CVE-2018-7572 | 1 Pulsesecure | 1 Pulse Secure Desktop | 2018-11-27 | N/A |
| Pulse Secure Client 9.0R1 and 5.3RX before 5.3R5, when configured to authenticate VPN users during Windows Logon, can allow attackers to bypass Windows authentication and execute commands on the system with the privileges of Pulse Secure Client. The attacker must interrupt the client's network connectivity, and trigger a connection to a crafted proxy server with an invalid SSL certificate that allows certification-manager access, leading to the ability to browse local files and execute local programs. | ||||
| CVE-2018-6374 | 1 Pulsesecure | 1 Desktop Linux Client | 2018-02-24 | N/A |
| The GUI component (aka PulseUI) in Pulse Secure Desktop Linux clients before PULSE5.2R9.2 and 5.3.x before PULSE5.3R4.2 does not perform strict SSL Certificate Validation. This can lead to the manipulation of the Pulse Connection set. | ||||
| CVE-2017-17947 | 1 Pulsesecure | 1 Pulse Connect Secure | 2018-02-06 | N/A |
| A cross site scripting issue has been found in custompage.cgi in Pulse Secure Pulse Connect Secure (PCS) before 8.0R17.0, 8.1.x before 8.1R13, 8.2.x before 8.2R9, and 8.3.x before 8.3R3 and Pulse Policy Secure (PPS) before 5.2R10, 5.3.x before 5.3R9, and 5.4.x before 5.4R3 due to one of the URL parameters not being sanitized. Exploitation does require the user to be logged in as administrator; the issue is not applicable to the end user portal. | ||||
| CVE-2017-14935 | 1 Pulsesecure | 1 Pulse One On-premise | 2017-10-06 | N/A |
| Pulse Secure Pulse One On-Premise 2.0.1649 and below does not properly validate requests, which allows remote users to query and obtain sensitive information. | ||||
| CVE-2017-11193 | 1 Pulsesecure | 1 Pulse Connect Secure | 2017-07-20 | N/A |
| Pulse Connect Secure 8.3R1 has CSRF in diag.cgi. In the panel, the diag.cgi file is responsible for running commands such as ping, ping6, traceroute, traceroute6, nslookup, arp, and Portprobe. These functions do not have any protections against CSRF. That can allow an attacker to run these commands against any IP if they can get an admin to visit their malicious CSRF page. | ||||
| CVE-2017-11196 | 1 Pulsesecure | 1 Pulse Connect Secure | 2017-07-19 | N/A |
| Pulse Connect Secure 8.3R1 has CSRF in logout.cgi. The logout function of the admin panel is not protected by any CSRF tokens, thus allowing an attacker to logout a user by making them visit a malicious web page. | ||||
| CVE-2017-11195 | 1 Pulsesecure | 1 Pulse Connect Secure | 2017-07-19 | N/A |
| Pulse Connect Secure 8.3R1 has Reflected XSS in launchHelp.cgi. The helpLaunchPage parameter is reflected in an IFRAME element, if the value contains two quotes. It properly sanitizes quotes and tags, so one cannot simply close the src with a quote and inject after that. However, an attacker can use javascript: or data: to abuse this. | ||||
| CVE-2017-11194 | 1 Pulsesecure | 1 Pulse Connect Secure | 2017-07-17 | N/A |
| Pulse Connect Secure 8.3R1 has Reflected XSS in adminservercacertdetails.cgi. In the admin panel, the certid parameter of adminservercacertdetails.cgi is reflected in the application's response and is not properly sanitized, allowing an attacker to inject tags. An attacker could come up with clever payloads to make the system run commands such as ping, ping6, traceroute, nslookup, arp, etc. | ||||