Filtered by vendor Hcltech
Subscribe
Total
177 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v2 | CVSS v3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2019-4327 | 1 Hcltech | 1 Appscan | 2024-02-28 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| "HCL AppScan Enterprise uses hard-coded credentials which can be exploited by attackers to get unauthorized access to application's encrypted files." | |||||
| CVE-2020-4085 | 1 Hcltech | 1 Connections | 2024-02-28 | 4.0 MEDIUM | 6.5 MEDIUM |
| "HCL Connections is vulnerable to possible information leakage and could disclose sensitive information via stack trace to a local user." | |||||
| CVE-2017-1712 | 1 Hcltech | 1 Domino | 2024-02-28 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 5.9 MEDIUM |
| "A vulnerability in the TLS protocol implementation of the Domino server could allow an unauthenticated, remote attacker to access sensitive information, aka a Return of Bleichenbacher's Oracle Threat (ROBOT) attack. An attacker could iteratively query a server running a vulnerable TLS stack implementation to perform cryptanalytic operations that may allow decryption of previously captured TLS sessions." | |||||
| CVE-2019-4091 | 1 Hcltech | 1 Marketing Campaign | 2024-02-28 | 3.5 LOW | 5.4 MEDIUM |
| "HCL Marketing Platform is vulnerable to cross-site scripting during addition of new users and also while searching for users in Dashboard, potentially giving an attacker ability to inject malicious code into the system. " | |||||
| CVE-2019-4209 | 1 Hcltech | 1 Connections | 2024-02-28 | 5.8 MEDIUM | 6.1 MEDIUM |
| HCL Connections v5.5, v6.0, and v6.5 contains an open redirect vulnerability which could be exploited by an attacker to conduct phishing attacks. | |||||
| CVE-2020-4089 | 1 Hcltech | 1 Notes | 2024-02-28 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 6.5 MEDIUM |
| HCL Notes is vulnerable to an information leakage vulnerability through its support for the 'mailto' protocol. This vulnerability could result in files from the user's filesystem or connected network filesystems being leaked to a third party. All versions of HCL Notes 9, 10 and 11 are affected. | |||||
| CVE-2019-4090 | 1 Hcltech | 1 Marketing Campaign | 2024-02-28 | 3.5 LOW | 5.4 MEDIUM |
| "HCL Campaign is vulnerable to cross-site scripting when a user provides XSS scripts in Campaign Description field." | |||||
| CVE-2020-4101 | 1 Hcltech | 1 Hcl Digital Experience | 2024-02-28 | 7.5 HIGH | 9.8 CRITICAL |
| "HCL Digital Experience is susceptible to Server Side Request Forgery." | |||||
| CVE-2019-4388 | 1 Hcltech | 1 Appscan Source | 2024-02-28 | 3.5 LOW | 4.8 MEDIUM |
| HCL AppScan Source 9.0.3.13 and earlier is susceptible to cross-site scripting (XSS) attacks by allowing users to embed arbitrary JavaScript code in the Web UI. | |||||
| CVE-2020-4083 | 1 Hcltech | 1 Connections | 2024-02-28 | 2.1 LOW | 5.5 MEDIUM |
| HCL Connections 6.5 is vulnerable to possible information leakage. Connections could disclose sensitive information via trace logs to a local user. | |||||
| CVE-2020-4084 | 1 Hcltech | 1 Connections | 2024-02-28 | 3.5 LOW | 5.4 MEDIUM |
| HCL Connections v5.5, v6.0, and v6.5 are vulnerable to cross-site scripting. This vulnerability allows users to embed arbitrary JavaScript code in the Web UI thus altering the intended functionality potentially leading to credentials disclosure within a trusted session. | |||||
| CVE-2019-4392 | 1 Hcltech | 1 Appscan | 2024-02-28 | 10.0 HIGH | 9.8 CRITICAL |
| HCL AppScan Standard Edition 9.0.3.13 and earlier uses hard-coded credentials which can be exploited by attackers to get unauthorized access to the system. | |||||
| CVE-2019-4409 | 1 Hcltech | 1 Traveler | 2024-02-28 | 3.5 LOW | 5.4 MEDIUM |
| HCL Traveler versions 9.x and earlier are susceptible to cross-site scripting attacks. On the Problem Report page of the Traveler servlet pages, there is a field to specify a file attachment to provide additional problem details. An invalid file name returns an error message that includes the entered file name. If the file name is not escaped in the returned error page, it could expose a cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability. | |||||
| CVE-2020-4082 | 1 Hcltech | 1 Connections | 2024-02-28 | 3.5 LOW | 5.4 MEDIUM |
| The HCL Connections 5.5 help system is vulnerable to cross-site scripting, caused by improper validation of user-supplied input. A remote attacker could exploit this vulnerability using a specially-crafted URL to execute script in a victim's Web browser within the security context of the hosting Web site, once the URL is clicked. An attacker could use this vulnerability to steal the victim's cookie-based authentication credentials. | |||||
| CVE-2019-4301 | 1 Hcltech | 1 Self-service Application | 2024-02-28 | 6.0 MEDIUM | 8.4 HIGH |
| BigFix Self-Service Application (SSA) is vulnerable to arbitrary code execution if Javascript code is included in Running Message or Post Message HTML. | |||||
| CVE-2019-16188 | 1 Hcltech | 1 Appscan Source | 2024-02-28 | 5.8 MEDIUM | 7.1 HIGH |
| HCL AppScan Source before 9.03.13 is susceptible to XML External Entity (XXE) attacks in multiple locations. In particular, an attacker can send a specially crafted .ozasmt file to a targeted victim and ask the victim to open it. When the victim imports the .ozasmt file in AppScan Source, the content of any file in the local file system (to which the victim as read access) can be exfiltrated to a remote listener under the attacker's control. The product does not disable external XML Entity Processing, which can lead to information disclosure and denial of services attacks. | |||||
| CVE-2018-11518 | 1 Hcltech | 2 Legacy Ivr, Legacy Ivr Firmware | 2024-02-28 | 6.8 MEDIUM | 8.1 HIGH |
| A vulnerability allows a phreaking attack on HCL legacy IVR systems that do not use VoIP. These IVR systems rely on various frequencies of audio signals; based on the frequency, certain commands and functions are processed. Since these frequencies are accepted within a phone call, an attacker can record these frequencies and use them for service activations. This is a request-forgery issue when the required series of DTMF signals for a service activation is predictable (e.g., the IVR system does not speak a nonce to the caller). In this case, the IVR system accepts an activation request from a less-secure channel (any loudspeaker in the caller's physical environment) without verifying that the request was intended (it matches a nonce sent over a more-secure channel to the caller's earpiece). | |||||