| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| The Server Message Block 1.0 (SMBv1) on Microsoft Windows Server 2008 SP2 and R2 SP1, Windows 7 SP1, Windows 8.1, Windows Server 2012 Gold and R2, Windows RT 8.1, Windows 10 Gold, 1511, 1607, and 1703, and Windows Server 2016, allows a remote code execution vulnerability when it fails to properly handle certain requests, aka "Windows SMB Remote Code Execution Vulnerability". |
| An exploitable integer overflow vulnerability exists in the xls_appendSST function of libxls 1.4.A specially crafted XLS file can cause memory corruption resulting in remote code execution. |
| A remote code execution vulnerability exists in Microsoft Edge in the way affected Microsoft scripting engines render when handling objects in memory, aka "Microsoft Edge Remote Code Execution Vulnerability." |
| OpenWebif 1.2.5 allows remote code execution via a URL to the CallOPKG function in the IpkgController class in plugin/controllers/ipkg.py, when the URL refers to an attacker-controlled web site with a Trojan horse package. This has security implications in cases where untrusted users can trigger CallOPKG calls, and these users can enter an arbitrary URL in an input field, even though that input field was only intended for a package name. This threat model may be relevant in the latest versions of third-party products that bundle OpenWebif, i.e., set-top box products. The issue of Trojan horse packages does NOT have security implications in cases where the attacker has full OpenWebif access. |
| The Microsoft Server Message Block 1.0 (SMBv1) server on Microsoft Windows Server 2008 SP2 and R2 SP1, Windows 7 SP1, Windows 8.1, Windows Server 2012 Gold and R2, Windows RT 8.1, Windows 10 Gold, 1511, 1607, and 1703, and Windows Server 2016 allows an attacker to execute remote code by the way it handles certain requests, aka "Windows SMB Remote Code Execution Vulnerability". This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2017-0277, CVE-2017-0278, and CVE-2017-0279. |
| The Microsoft Server Message Block 1.0 (SMBv1) server on Microsoft Windows Server 2008 SP2 and R2 SP1, Windows 7 SP1, Windows 8.1, Windows Server 2012 Gold and R2, Windows RT 8.1, Windows 10 Gold, 1511, 1607, and 1703, and Windows Server 2016 allows an attacker to execute remote code by the way it handles certain requests, aka "Windows SMB Remote Code Execution Vulnerability". This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2017-0272, CVE-2017-0278, and CVE-2017-0279. |
| import.php (aka the Phonebook import feature) in PlaySMS 1.4 allows remote code execution via vectors involving the User-Agent HTTP header and PHP code in the name of a file. |
| Microsoft Office 2007 SP3, Office 2010 SP2, Office 2013 SP1, Office 2016, Office Online Server 2016, Office Web Apps 2010 SP2,Office Web Apps 2013 SP1, Project Server 2013 SP1, SharePoint Enterprise Server 2013 SP1, SharePoint Enterprise Server 2016, SharePoint Foundation 2013 SP1, Sharepoint Server 2010 SP2, Word 2016, and Skype for Business 2016 allow a remote code execution vulnerability when the software fails to properly handle objects in memory, aka "Office Remote Code Execution Vulnerability". This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2017-0261 and CVE-2017-0262. |
| A remote code execution vulnerability exists in Microsoft browsers in the way JavaScript scripting engines handle objects in memory, aka "Scripting Engine Memory Corruption Vulnerability." This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2017-0224, CVE-2017-0228, CVE-2017-0229, CVE-2017-0230, CVE-2017-0234, CVE-2017-0235, and CVE-2017-0236. |
| In Veritas Backup Exec 2014 before build 14.1.1187.1126, 15 before build 14.2.1180.3160, and 16 before FP1, there is a use-after-free vulnerability in multiple agents that can lead to a denial of service or remote code execution. An unauthenticated attacker can use this vulnerability to crash the agent or potentially take control of the agent process and then the system it is running on. |
| A remote code execution vulnerability exists in Microsoft Edge in the way that the Chakra JavaScript engine renders when handling objects in memory, aka "Scripting Engine Memory Corruption Vulnerability." This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2017-0224, CVE-2017-0228, CVE-2017-0229, CVE-2017-0230, CVE-2017-0234, CVE-2017-0235, and CVE-2017-0238. |
| A remote code execution vulnerability exists in Microsoft browsers in the way JavaScript engines render when handling objects in memory, aka "Scripting Engine Memory Corruption Vulnerability." This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2017-0224, CVE-2017-0229, CVE-2017-0230, CVE-2017-0234, CVE-2017-0235, CVE-2017-0236, and CVE-2017-0238. |
| Uniscribe in Windows Server 2008 SP2 and R2 SP1, Windows 7 SP1, Windows 8.1, Windows Server 2012 Gold and R2, Windows RT 8.1, Windows 10 Gold, 1511, 1607, Windows Server 2016, Microsoft Office 2007 SP3, Microsoft Office 2010 SP2, Microsoft Office Word Viewer, Microsoft Lync 2013 SP1, Skype for Business 2016, Microsoft Silverlight 5 Developer Runtime when installed on Microsoft Windows, and Microsoft Silverlight 5 when installed on Microsoft Windows allows a remote code execution vulnerability due to the way it handles objects in memory, aka "Windows Uniscribe Remote Code Execution Vulnerability". This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2017-8528. |
| A remote code execution vulnerability exists in Microsoft PowerPoint 2007 Service Pack 3, Microsoft PowerPoint 2010 Service Pack 2, Microsoft PowerPoint 2013 Service Pack 1, Microsoft PowerPoint 2013 RT Service Pack 1, Microsoft PowerPoint 2016, Microsoft PowerPoint Viewer 2007, Microsoft SharePoint Server 2013 Service Pack 1, Microsoft SharePoint Enterprise Server 2016, Microsoft Office Web Apps 2010 Service Pack 2, and Microsoft Office Compatibility Pack Service Pack 3 when they fail to properly handle objects in memory, aka "PowerPoint Remote Code Execution Vulnerability". This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2017-8743. |
| Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0, 3.5, 4.5.2, 4.6, 4.6.1, 4.6.2 and 4.7 allows an attacker with access to the local system to execute malicious code, aka ".NET Remote Code Execution Vulnerability." |
| A remote code execution vulnerability exists in the way affected Microsoft scripting engines render when handling objects in memory in Microsoft browsers. These vulnerabilities could corrupt memory in such a way that an attacker could execute arbitrary code in the context of the current user. An attacker who successfully exploited the vulnerability could gain the same user rights as the current user. If the current user is logged on with administrative user rights, an attacker who successfully exploited the vulnerability could take control of an affected system. An attacker could then install programs; view, change, or delete data; or create new accounts with full user rights. This vulnerability is different from those described in CVE-2017-0010, CVE-2017-0015, CVE-2017-0032, CVE-2017-0035, CVE-2017-0067, CVE-2017-0070, CVE-2017-0071, CVE-2017-0094, CVE-2017-0131, CVE-2017-0132, CVE-2017-0133, CVE-2017-0134, CVE-2017-0136, CVE-2017-0137, CVE-2017-0138, CVE-2017-0141, and CVE-2017-0151. |
| A remote code execution vulnerability exists in the way affected Microsoft scripting engines render when handling objects in memory in Microsoft browsers. These vulnerabilities could corrupt memory in such a way that an attacker could execute arbitrary code in the context of the current user. An attacker who successfully exploited the vulnerability could gain the same user rights as the current user. If the current user is logged on with administrative user rights, an attacker who successfully exploited the vulnerability could take control of an affected system. An attacker could then install programs; view, change, or delete data; or create new accounts with full user rights. This vulnerability is different from those described in CVE-2017-0010, CVE-2017-0015, CVE-2017-0032, CVE-2017-0035, CVE-2017-0067, CVE-2017-0070, CVE-2017-0071, CVE-2017-0094, CVE-2017-0131, CVE-2017-0132, CVE-2017-0133, CVE-2017-0134, CVE-2017-0137, CVE-2017-0138, CVE-2017-0141, CVE-2017-0150, and CVE-2017-0151. |
| A remote code execution vulnerability exists in the way affected Microsoft scripting engines render when handling objects in memory in Microsoft browsers. These vulnerabilities could corrupt memory in such a way that an attacker could execute arbitrary code in the context of the current user. An attacker who successfully exploited the vulnerability could gain the same user rights as the current user. If the current user is logged on with administrative user rights, an attacker who successfully exploited the vulnerability could take control of an affected system. An attacker could then install programs; view, change, or delete data; or create new accounts with full user rights. This vulnerability is different from those described in CVE-2017-0010, CVE-2017-0015, CVE-2017-0032, CVE-2017-0035, CVE-2017-0067, CVE-2017-0070, CVE-2017-0071, CVE-2017-0094, CVE-2017-0132, CVE-2017-0133, CVE-2017-0134, CVE-2017-0136, CVE-2017-0137, CVE-2017-0138, CVE-2017-0141, CVE-2017-0150, and CVE-2017-0151. |
| In cellular modem firmware, there is a possible out of bounds read due to a missing bounds check. This could lead to remote code execution with LTE authentication needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.Product: AndroidVersions: Android kernelAndroid ID: A-240462530References: N/A |
| In the Pixel cellular firmware, there is a possible out of bounds write due to a missing bounds check. This could lead to remote code execution with LTE authentication needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.Product: AndroidVersions: Android kernelAndroid ID: A-238914868References: N/A |
