Software Vulnerability

Similar Questions

• OpenSSL vulnerability software

  I see a lot of news based on the alias of OpenSSL software vulnerability.

  For more information:

  http://www.ZDNet.com/heartbleed-serious-OpenSSL-zero-day-vulnerability-revealed-7000028166/

  security - software: what is and what are the options to mitigate? -Server fault

  https://blog.cloudflare.com/staying-ahead-of-OpenSSL-vulnerabilities

  https://Web.NVD.nist.gov/view/vuln/detail?vulnId=CVE-2014-0160

  I did some searching but can't find any relationship with VMware/ESXi

  My question is this also influences the environment vSphere somehow?

  I hope that VMware will soon release a notice of security clear things and providing updates to this horrible problem (which is not their fault).

  The openssl software bug seems to affect ESXi as well. Virtual appliances based on recent Linux as the VCSA, vMA, etc. may be vulnerable too:

  Which versions of OpenSSL are affected?

  Status of different versions:

     OpenSSL 1.0.1 through 1.0.1f (included) are vulnerable

  1.0.1g OpenSSL is NOT vulnerable

  OpenSSL 1.0.0 branch is NOT vulnerable

  OpenSSL 0.9.8 branch is NOT vulnerable

  Bug was introduced in OpenSSL in December 2011 and has been in the wild since OpenSSL version 1.0.1 March 14, 2012. Published April 7, 2014 1.0.1g OpenSSL fixes the bug

  Let's take a look at a host of ESXi 5.5 GA (no U1):

  # vmware - vl

  VMware ESXi 5.5.0 build-1331820

  VMware ESXi 5.5.0 GA

  
  

  # OpenSSL version-

  OpenSSL 1.0.1e February 11, 2013

  built: kills Feb 26 16:34:26 PST 2013

  Now, here's a 5.1 U2 to update ESXi host:

  # vmware - vl

  VMware ESXi 5.1.0 build-1612806

  Updating VMware ESXi 5.1.0 2

  
  

  ~ # OpenSSL version -

  OpenSSL 0.9.8y 5 February 2013

  built: Fri Mar 20 20:44:08 CDT 2013

  As you can see, ESXi 5.5 runs the branch vulnerable openssl 1.0.1. ESXi 5.1 U2 also uses the openssl 0.9.8 branch. So versions prior to ESXi 5.5 should be affected.

  I have a virtual appliance of older vMA 5.1 which is unchanged, as well:

  # cat/etc/vma-release

  vMA 5.1.0 BUILD-1062361

  # cat/etc/SuSE - release

  SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 11 (x86_64)

  VERSION = 11

  PATCHLEVEL = 2

  # OpenSSL version-

  OpenSSL 1.0.0c December 2, 2010

  At least the vCenter non Inventory Service seems to depend on the openssl library as well:

  A 5.1 vCenter U2 seems of course:

  "C:\Program Files\VMware\Infrastructure\Inventory Service\bin\openssl.exe" version - a

  OpenSSL 0.9.8y 5 February 2013

  built: Thu Feb 12 23:38:08 2013

  There are two binary openssl on a test vCenter 5.5 GA of mine, one of them having a vulnerable version:

  "C:\Program Files\VMware\CIS\openSSL\openssl.exe" version - a

  OpenSSL 1.0.1e February 11, 2013

  built: Thu Feb 12 19:37:08 2013

  "C:\Program Files\VMware\Infrastructure\Inventory Service\bin\openssl.exe" version - a

  OpenSSL 0.9.8y 5 February 2013

  built: Thu Feb 12 23:38:08 2013

• 9.3.5 IOS is available.

  It seems to be a security update. Thanks to the demo to find and announcing the update.

  3 security patches to fix zero day that installs spyware

  http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/26/technology/Apple-software-vulnerability-iOS-PA tch.html? _r = 1

• The site is secure or must change us password?

  Several news reports today say accounts are at risk for at least 2 years and everyone has to change all passwords - it's true

  Hello erroni, are you curious about this site in particular ([support.mozilla.org])? It is not affected by recent software vulnerability, however, two other web services by mozilla (firefox accounts, persona) were: https://blog.mozilla.org/security/2014/04/08/heartbleed-security-advisory/

  If your question was more on a general term, then yes it is true that this recently discovered and widespread vulnerability can / could be used to make affected sites flow very sensitive information (passwords user, encryption keys, etc.). especially if you have shared in the past a single password for multiple sites, you must change it as soon as possible and set a separate password according to the Web site.

  http://arstechnica.com/security/2014/04/critical-crypto-bug-exposes-Yahoo-mail-passwords-Russian-roulette-style/

  http://heartbleed.com/

• The fake Flash Player update infects Macs with Shareware

  This isn't a question, but just an info > see below:

  (I hope), anyone who has used computers for some time must be aware of the ritual without end of update Adobe Flash against security vulnerabilities. Even if you run Flash on your computer, you have probably seen many titles in the media of tech in the years of the importance of keeping Adobe Flash (and his crony Acrobat PDF Reader) updated to protect against malicious attacks.

  Then, what better way to trick someone with their computer infected only by disguising it in an actual Adobe Flash update?

  It is precisely this that criminals are now, in their attempts to infect the Apple Mac users with scareware.

  The first sign you will see that the criminals are looking to infect your computer Mac OS X is if you see a pop-up window as it appear while you browse the web: (photo here)

  The beauty of this approach, point of view of criminals, is that the attack is not invoke any software vulnerability or exploit. Instead, social engineering is used to fool the uninformed user unwittingly download and does not perform a fake Adobe Flash version - designed to infect their computer with scareware.

  If you are interested in seeing the article, that is:

  https://www.Intego.com/Mac-Security-blog/fake-Flash-Player-update-infects-Mac-wi th-scareware? utm_medium = email & utm_sourc...

• Windows Update Agent fails to detect the updates (Windows Server WSUS with SCCM)

  Howdy

  We recently integreated WSUS in SCCM 2012, which means WSUS updates are now provided through the software Center instead of through the Windows Update client. This does not work as expected.

  However, we are using Kaspersky Endpoint Security, which has a function of software vulnerability report that we want to use. This could inform us of all the machines that do not have all their updates installed. It is a simpler than using SCCM reports interface. When searching for vulnerabilities, Kaspersky Network agent uses the Windows Update Agent service to find updates in WSUS. This function does not work on our customers, where it can detect a single Windows Update. I have a transcript example from the WindowsUpdate.log file below:

  ========================================================================================
  2016-05-25 16:10:37:917 884 7ac Agent *.
  2016-05-25 16:10:37:917 884 7ac Agent * START * Agent: finding updates [CallerId = Kaspersky Network Agent] of
  2016-05-25 16:10:37:917 884 7ac Agent *.
  2016-05-25 16:10:37:917 884 7ac Agent * Include potentially this cancels the updates
  2016-05-25 16:10:37:917 884 7ac Agent * Online = Yes; Ignore download priority = No
  2016-05-25 16:10:37:917 884 7ac Agent * criteria = "IsInstalled = 0 AND IsHidden = 0 OR IsInstalled = 1".
  2016-05-25 16:10:37:917 884 7ac Agent * ServiceID = {00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000} third party service
  2016-05-25 16:10:37:917 884 7ac Agent * scope of search = {Machine}
  2016-05-25 16:10:37:918 3988 d5c COMAPI<-- submitted="" --="" comapi:="" search="" [clientid="Kaspersky" network="">
  2016-05-25 16:10:38:826 884 7ac PT +++ PT: Synchronizing server updates +++
  2016-05-25 16:10:38:826 884 7ac PT + ServiceId = {3DA21691-E39D-4DA6-8A4B-B43877BCB1B7}, server URL = http://OURSCCMSERVER:8530/ClientWebService/client.asmx
  2016-05-25 16:10:57:878 884 7ac PT +++ PT: synchronizing extended update info +++
  2016-05-25 16:10:57:878 884 7ac PT + ServiceId = {3DA21691-E39D-4DA6-8A4B-B43877BCB1B7}, server URL = http://OURSCCMSERVER:8530/ClientWebService/client.asmx
  2016-05-25 16:10:57:986 884 7ac Agent * updated added {80FEF50B-F349-4BDC-B781-FF8CD6D913F6}.201 in search result
  2016-05-25 16:10:57:986 884 7ac Agent * updates found 1 to 123 categories in the search. evaluated Appl. rules of 1372 out of 2495 deployed entities
  2016-05-25 16:10:57:988 884 7ac Agent *.
  2016-05-25 16:10:57:988 884 7ac Agent * END * Agent: finding updates [CallerId = Kaspersky Network Agent] of
  2016-05-25 16:10:57:988 884 7ac Agent *.
  2016-05-25 16:10:57:990 b 3988 6-0 COMAPI > COMAPI - RECOVERY -: search [ClientId = Kaspersky Network Agent]
  2016-05-25 16:10:57:991 3988 COMAPI 6 b 0 - updates found = 1
  2016-05-25 16:10:57:991 b 3988 6-0 COMAPI-
  2016-05-25 16:10:57:991 b 3988 6-0 COMAPI - END--COMAPI: search [ClientId = Kaspersky Network Agent]
  2016-05-25 16:10:57:991 b 3988 6-0 COMAPI-
  ========================================================================================

  As you can see on this update of the transcript were found only 1. This was taken from a test machine that has been built recently and had lost a large part of the updates.

  We also have in our devices infrastructure traditional WSUS running on a different server (not SCCM), which are reports in fine and properly, Kaspersky detects missing updates.

  We determined with Kaspersky that the problem lies in the Windows Update agent and not their software. Can anyone tell if the question is because we use SCCM for updates (and therefore Windows Update agent is not working properly) or that there is another issue that can be resolved?

  Russell

  It is a forum for specific consumers.

  You will find support for WSUS in this forum: http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/windowsserver/en-US/home?forum=winserverwsus

• VCS - C and VCS-E switch to 7.2.2 8.1

  Hello Experts,

  We want to deploy Jabber via Expressway Edge (ARM) solution and we must improve our course VCS-C and E servers (7.2.2).

  We have a few old polycoms I wonder if the upgrade of VCS may break legacy polycoms.

  TMS units and MCU does not require the upgrade.

  Recording methods recording of an endpoint of the VCS has not changed, so if your endpoints are now save correctly, they should continue to do the upgrade so.following.

  Support for some of the older devices of Polycom fell in new versions of TMS, so if you are considering upgrading from TMS at any time, you may need to close look at the release notes.

  Please note that it is changed a bit between X 7 and X 8 port, so make sure that before any upgrade, you had a good thorough read of version X8.1.1 and notes to any firewall for ports has changed.

  PS - You should X8.1.1 on the VCSes, not only X8.1, as X8.1.1 the OpenSSL software vulnerability patches.

  Wayne
  --
  Remember the frequency responses and mark your question as answered as appropriate.

• How to install with built-in database?

  I need to re - install hyperic on my local machine. so I downloaded from sourceforge "hyperic-hq-installer-x86-64-win-5.8.2.zip." I run the installer without any 'mode' so he must use the integrated database shouldn't it? But instead the installer asks about the connection url and credentials and does not use a built-in database. at the end - using all the default values, I get "Error connecting to the database, enter new database data".

  So how to install it with embedded database?

  Hello

  5.8.2 and above, we have removed the embedded DB due to the software vulnerability attack postgres.

  You must use external postgres SQL.

  The reasons were:

  Only local processes on the computer can communicate with the sense of the DB (using localhost\loopback) db-server communication is not accessible from the outside of the machine.  Machine attackers outside Hyperic cannot connect and operate software attacks without:

  1. get access to the machine and

  2. activation of SSL.

  Thank you

  Yaron

• Cisco IOS Software Internet Key Exchange vulnerability Enquiry

  Products affected

  Cisco IOS devices are vulnerable when you run a software image of an affected version of the Cisco IOS software that does not support the IKE version 2 (IKEv2) and is configured to use IKE version 1 (IKEv1).

  Vulnerable products

  This vulnerability affects Cisco IOS 15.1GC, 15.1 T software version trains and 15.1XB. No other Cisco IOS software release trains are affected.

  Ref: http://tools.cisco.com/security/center/content/CiscoSecurityAdvisory/cisco-sa-20130327-ike

  If we use "not affected (for example; version". 12.4, 15.0 releases)"and configured with IKE version1?  Can it be affected by this vulnerability?

  Subsys router #sh | include ikev2

  ikev2_cli_registry registry 1.000.001

  Thank you best regards &,.

  Ye

  You are not affected by this vulnerability.

  As described in the notice - "There is no affected 12.4 based rejection" and «There is no rejection of base affected 15.0»

• This version of Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance Software Version 9.6 (1) 5 is affected by Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance SNMP Remote Code execution vulnerability and Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance CLI Remote Code execution vulnerability of

  This version of Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance Software Version 9.6 (1) 5 is affected by Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance SNMP Remote Code execution vulnerability and Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance CLI Remote Code execution vulnerability of

  Hi vrian_colaba,

  You can take a look at cisco's Advisory here:

  https://Tools.Cisco.com/Security/Center/content/CiscoSecurityAdvisory/CI...

  Fixed versions

  Cisco ASA Major Release	First version fixed
  7.2	Affected; migrate to 9.1.7(9) or later
  8.0	Affected; migrate to 9.1.7(9) or later
  8.1	Affected; migrate to 9.1.7(9) or later
  8.2	Affected; migrate to 9.1.7(9) or later
  8.3	Affected; migrate to 9.1.7(9) or later
  8.4	Affected; migrate to 9.1.7(9) or later
  8.5	Affected; migrate to 9.1.7(9) or later
  8.6	Affected; migrate to 9.1.7(9) or later
  8.7	Affected; migrate to 9.1.7(9) or later
  9.0	9.0.4 (40)
  9.1	9.1.7(9)
  9.2	9.2.4 (14)
  9.3	9.3.3 (10)
  9.4	9.4.3(8) ETA 26/08/2016
  9.5	9.5 (3) ETA 30/08/2016
  9.6 (DFT)	9.6.1 (11) / 6.0.1(2) FTD
  9.6 (ASA)	9.6.2

  5 9.6 (1) is not part of the fixed versions, this means that is assigned for the SNMP Remote Code execution vulnerability.

  Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance CLI Remote Code vulnerability to run you can also take a look at cisco's Advisory here:

  https://Tools.Cisco.com/Security/Center/content/CiscoSecurityAdvisory/CI...

  Fixed versions

  The following table shows the first software versions that include fixes for this vulnerability (9.6 is not affected)

  Cisco ASA Major Release	First version fixed
  7.2	Affected, migrate to 8.4 (3) or later
  8.0	Affected, migrate to 8.4 (3) or later
  8.1	Affected, migrate to 8.4 (3) or later
  8.2	Affected, migrate to 8.4 (3) or later
  8.3	Affected, migrate to 8.4 (3) or later
  8.4	8.4 (3)
  8.5	Affected, migrate to 9.0 (1) or later version
  8.6	Affected, migrate to 9.0 (1) or later version
  8.7	Affected, migrate to 9.0 (1) or later version
  9.0	9.0 (1)
  9.1	Not affected
  9.2	Not affected
  9.3	Not affected
  9.4	Not affected
  9.5	Not affected
  9.6	Not affected

  Hope this info helps!

  Note If you help!

  -JP-

• This version of 5.5 U1 is vulnerable to the software? 1892794

  Hello

  I saw that there is a patch for 5.5 U1 to HeartBleed (ESXi550-201404001), we run build 1892794.  Research on the portal of the patch, this contains the following hotfixes:

  ESXi550-201407405-BG

  KO 2077411

  Critical bug fix

  Esx-base updates

  ESXi550-201407401-BG

  KO 2077407

  Critical bug fix

  Tools-light updates

  ESXi550-201407403-BG

  KO 2077409

  Fixed an Important bug

  Misc-drivers updates

  ESXi550-201407402-BG

  KO 2077408

  Fixed an Important bug

  Megaraid sas scsi updates

  ESXi550-201407404-BG

  KO 2077410

  Fixed an Important bug

  Esx-base updates

  ESXi550-201407101-SG

  KO 2077414

  Criticism of security

  Tools-light updates

  ESXi550-201407102-SG

  2077415 KB

  Important safety

  This suggests that the patch is NOT included in this version, but I learned that some of these bugs are cumulative and include patches.  Which is correct?

  Thank you

  Hello Dan,.

  Yes VMware fixes are cumulative so with build 1892794 you are already patched for the vulnerability of the software.

  Patch ESXi550-201404001 will take you to the version 1746018 which are already on the vulnerability of HB.

  Patch ESXi550-201404020 will take you to the version 1746974 which are already on the vulnerability of HB.

  ESXi 5.5 Patch 2	2014-07-01	1892794	Ok
  ESXi 5.5 Patch Express 4	2014 06-11	1881737	Ok
  ESXi 5.5 Update 1 has	2014-04-19	1746018	Ok
  ESXi 5.5 Express Patch3	2014-04-19	1746974	Ok
  ESXi 5.5 Update 1	2014 03-11	1623387	Vulnerable

  For the latest security patches, see this article:

  VMware KB: Security of VMware connection guidelines for ESXi and ESX

  So if you want the latest patch of security (for ESXi 5.5) go to the Patch ESXi550-201410101-SG this will update only the VIB esx-base and bring your host to the build 2093874.

  Or update the image with Patch version ESXi550-201410001 (including SG above) which will bring you to the last build real 2143827. (5.5 Patch3 ESXi)

• Fusion 5.0.4 and software/OpenSSL vulnerability - affected or not?

  Hi all

  My Parallels Desktop imploded, forcing me to start over, and I thought that now is the ideal time to move (back) to the merger, once and for all. A question for you guys (I hope a simple):

  I see that Fusion 6.0.3 is out to protect themselves against the Heartbleed, but there is no corresponding to 5.0.4 patch.

  This does mean that the vulnerability does not exist in earlier versions, or that there is and is simply not to be patched for older versions? Finances are tight, and I was hoping to just use my 5.0.4 existing license.

  Can I do it safely?

  Thank you!

  Fusion 5 is not affected by the problem of software.  See VMware KB: response to OpenSSL security issue CVE-2014-0160/CVE-2014-0346 a.k.a: 'Heartbleed'

  See you soon,.

  --

  Darius

• Panda Global 2013 reports anti-virus software constantly KB915597 MS is a vulnerability.

  This KB915597 has been downloaded 6 or more times during the month. My anti-virus Panda Global 2013 always says me it's a security risk.  Please help me remove these entries.

  I have read reports online that it is very dangerous.  I also get Wi - Fi intrusion so please stop downloading this KB915597.  AND I WANT TO SAY STOP IT DOWNLOAD!  Provide a method of permanent removal and permanent no-download of the tool of this intruder!

  Thu.

  I am not sure, but isn't KB915597 updates for Defender? ( http://support.microsoft.com/kb/915597 ). If so and you have a complete AV/Spyware of the product running, then perhaps you should not advocate as well. I do not advocate as I installed MSE which will turn off automatically.

  If this is the case, check whether the Defender is running and if so, try to turn it off and see what happens. But only if you're happy that Panda AV meets your requirements.

  To disable the Defender - open Action Center, security. When checking the article "software and spyware unwanted protection ' Panda is listed and that its on. In the 'show installed anti-spyware programs' Defender is listed, and it is on? If so, try turning it off. (At least a criterion).

• Mozilla has a similar plugin for the Chrome browser plugin which will alert users when they visit a Web site that is still vulnerable to software?

  The browser plugin has been mentioned on the BGR site today. Looks like a valid addition unless the issue is addressed in another way.

  There is now an add-on Firefox equivalent:

  • https://addons.Mozilla.org/firefox/addon/foxbleed/

• flash player mode disable how vulnerable protected?

  Lastest 38 FF now allows me to easily turn off protected mode FP which seems to heal my FP quite common crashes. The question I have is how vulnerable will I be if protected mode is disabled? I use FF with FP disabled for quite a while now with little inconvenience because almost everyone is using HTML. I'd appreciate comments everyone. Thank you

  It is obviously not safer, but in the real world (as long as you keep flash, your operating system, Firefox and your anti-virus software updated) it will not have a significant impact on your security. just stay smart online and use your common sense, do not install or click on things that look too good to be true.