Filtered by vendor Rpm
Subscriptions
Total
25 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v3.1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2021-20266 | 3 Fedoraproject, Redhat, Rpm | 3 Fedora, Enterprise Linux, Rpm | 2024-11-21 | 4.9 Medium |
| A flaw was found in RPM's hdrblobInit() in lib/header.c. This flaw allows an attacker who can modify the rpmdb to cause an out-of-bounds read. The highest threat from this vulnerability is to system availability. | ||||
| CVE-2019-3817 | 2 Redhat, Rpm | 3 Enterprise Linux, Rhel Extras Other, Libcomps | 2024-11-21 | N/A |
| A use-after-free flaw has been discovered in libcomps before version 0.1.10 in the way ObjMRTrees are merged. An attacker, who is able to make an application read a crafted comps XML file, may be able to crash the application or execute malicious code. | ||||
| CVE-2018-10897 | 2 Redhat, Rpm | 6 Enterprise Linux, Enterprise Linux Desktop, Enterprise Linux Server and 3 more | 2024-11-21 | 8.1 High |
| A directory traversal issue was found in reposync, a part of yum-utils, where reposync fails to sanitize paths in remote repository configuration files. If an attacker controls a repository, they may be able to copy files outside of the destination directory on the targeted system via path traversal. If reposync is running with heightened privileges on a targeted system, this flaw could potentially result in system compromise via the overwriting of critical system files. Version 1.1.31 and older are believed to be affected. | ||||
| CVE-2017-7501 | 1 Rpm | 1 Rpm | 2024-11-21 | N/A |
| It was found that versions of rpm before 4.13.0.2 use temporary files with predictable names when installing an RPM. An attacker with ability to write in a directory where files will be installed could create symbolic links to an arbitrary location and modify content, and possibly permissions to arbitrary files, which could be used for denial of service or possibly privilege escalation. | ||||
| CVE-2017-7500 | 1 Rpm | 1 Rpm | 2024-11-21 | N/A |
| It was found that rpm did not properly handle RPM installations when a destination path was a symbolic link to a directory, possibly changing ownership and permissions of an arbitrary directory, and RPM files being placed in an arbitrary destination. An attacker, with write access to a directory in which a subdirectory will be installed, could redirect that directory to an arbitrary location and gain root privilege. | ||||