Aggregator

A vulnerability was found in Fuji Electric TELLUS and TELLUS Lite 4.0.15.0. It has been rated as critical. Affected by this issue is some unknown functionality of the file and/or of the component SIM2 File Handler. The manipulation leads to stack-based buffer overflow. This vulnerability is handled as CVE-2023-32273. The attack needs to be initiated within the local network. There is no exploit available. It is recommended to upgrade the affected component.

A vulnerability classified as critical has been found in Fuji Electric TELLUS and TELLUS Lite 4.0.15.0. This affects an unknown part of the component V8 File Handler. The manipulation leads to buffer overflow. This vulnerability is uniquely identified as CVE-2023-32270. Access to the local network is required for this attack. There is no exploit available. It is recommended to upgrade the affected component.

A vulnerability classified as critical was found in Fuji Electric TELLUS and TELLUS Lite 4.0.15.0. This vulnerability affects unknown code of the component V8 File Handler. The manipulation leads to stack-based buffer overflow. This vulnerability was named CVE-2023-32276. Access to the local network is required for this attack to succeed. There is no exploit available. It is recommended to upgrade the affected component.

A vulnerability, which was classified as problematic, has been found in Fuji Electric TELLUS and TELLUS Lite 4.0.15.0. This issue affects some unknown processing of the component SIM File Handler. The manipulation leads to out-of-bounds read. The identification of this vulnerability is CVE-2023-32288. The attack needs to be approached within the local network. There is no exploit available. It is recommended to upgrade the affected component.

A vulnerability, which was classified as critical, was found in Fuji Electric TELLUS and TELLUS Lite 4.0.15.0. Affected is an unknown function of the component SIM2 File Handler. The manipulation leads to stack-based buffer overflow. This vulnerability is traded as CVE-2023-32538. The attack can only be done within the local network. There is no exploit available. It is recommended to upgrade the affected component.

A vulnerability was found in Fuji Electric V-Server and V-Server Lite up to 4.0.15.0. It has been classified as critical. This affects an unknown part of the component VPR File Handler. The manipulation leads to stack-based buffer overflow. This vulnerability is uniquely identified as CVE-2023-31239. The attack needs to be initiated within the local network. There is no exploit available. It is recommended to upgrade the affected component.

FBI, DC3, and NPA Identify North Korean Cyber Actors, Known as TraderTraitor, Behind $308 Million Cryptocurrency Theft from Bitcoin.DMM.com

A vulnerability was found in Red Hat Stronghold 2.3. It has been rated as problematic. This issue affects some unknown processing. The manipulation leads to cross site scripting. The identification of this vulnerability is CVE-2009-1349. The attack may be initiated remotely. Furthermore, there is an exploit available.

开发安全培训，此处主要是指给业务团队进行安全意识与安全技能的培训，如：安全规范培训、安全需求培训、安全工具培训、编码安全培训等，是SDL中很重要的一环。如果直接回答提问的话，答案肯定是Yes。 但对于“有效”的理解，不应该是达到100%的效果，比如组织编码安全培训后，不能期望开发时就不会引入漏洞，而是在开发时有意识思考有没有安全风险、弄不清楚的知道联系安全团队咨询、引入安全组件等。我想这是比较有效又合理的结果，不过要做到这程度并非易事，可以从三方面做努力： 1、培训的连续性，做到常态化、线上化； 2、培训得有考核，组织参与的人员/部门考试，排名并公布； 3、培训有针对性，针对研发人员、运维人员、产品经理做不同的内容设计。 此外曾经做过一次尝试，“把产生问题的人干掉”。即：年底，组织各业务写漏洞top排名的开发人员进行针对性学习及考试，惊喜的发现有不少人考了很多遍，有个研发刷了20+次直到拿到100分。 更多软件安全内容，可以访问： 1、SDL100问：我与SDL的故事 SAST误报太高，如何解决？ SDL需要哪些人参与？ 设计阶段应开展哪些安全活动？ 有哪些不错的安全设计参考资料？ 安全设计要求怎么做才能落地？ 有哪些威胁建模方法论？ 如何选择开源组件安全扫描(SCA)工具？ SCA工具扫描出很多漏洞，如何处理？ SCA工具识别出高风险协议，如何处理？ 应该如何选型代码安全扫描工具？ 白盒检测工具存在局限性，如何进行补偿？ SCA用什么系统做，自研还是外购？ 有没有好用的SDL平台？ Sonar是否好用以及误报率咋样？ 如何推进有问题的jar包更新？ SCA工具的误报率怎样？ 在研发安全流程落地方面，有何经验？ 如何说服业务完成checklist自检？ sdl会对项目变更代码做review吗？ 如何展示SDL的成果或效果？ SDL 40/100问：怎么解决源代码两张皮导致安全失效？ 2、SDL创新实践系列 首发！“ 研发安全运营 ” 架构研究与实践 DevSecOps实施关键：研发安全团队 DevSecOps实施关键：研发安全流程 DevSecOps实施关键：研发安全规范 从安全视角，看研发安全 数字化转型下的研发安全痛点

开发安全培训，此处主要是指给业务团队进行安全意识与安全技能的培训，如：安全规范培训、安全需求培训、安全工具培训、编码安全培训等，是SDL中很重要的一环。如果直接回答提问的话，答案肯定是Yes。 但对于“有效”的理解，不应该是达到100%的效果，比如组织编码安全培训后，不能期望开发时就不会引入漏洞，而是在开发时有意识思考有没有安全风险、弄不清楚的知道联系安全团队咨询、引入安全组件等。我想这是比较有效又合理的结果，不过要做到这程度并非易事，可以从三方面做努力： 1、培训的连续性，做到常态化、线上化； 2、培训得有考核，组织参与的人员/部门考试，排名并公布； 3、培训有针对性，针对研发人员、运维人员、产品经理做不同的内容设计。 此外曾经做过一次尝试，“把产生问题的人干掉”。即：年底，组织各业务写漏洞top排名的开发人员进行针对性学习及考试，惊喜的发现有不少人考了很多遍，有个研发刷了20+次直到拿到100分。 更多软件安全内容，可以访问： 1、SDL100问：我与SDL的故事 SAST误报太高，如何解决？ SDL需要哪些人参与？ 设计阶段应开展哪些安全活动？ 有哪些不错的安全设计参考资料？ 安全设计要求怎么做才能落地？ 有哪些威胁建模方法论？ 如何选择开源组件安全扫描(SCA)工具？ SCA工具扫描出很多漏洞，如何处理？ SCA工具识别出高风险协议，如何处理？ 应该如何选型代码安全扫描工具？ 白盒检测工具存在局限性，如何进行补偿？ SCA用什么系统做，自研还是外购？ 有没有好用的SDL平台？ Sonar是否好用以及误报率咋样？ 如何推进有问题的jar包更新？ SCA工具的误报率怎样？ 在研发安全流程落地方面，有何经验？ 如何说服业务完成checklist自检？ sdl会对项目变更代码做review吗？ 如何展示SDL的成果或效果？ SDL 40/100问：怎么解决源代码两张皮导致安全失效？ 2、SDL创新实践系列 首发！“ 研发安全运营 ” 架构研究与实践 DevSecOps实施关键：研发安全团队 DevSecOps实施关键：研发安全流程 DevSecOps实施关键：研发安全规范 从安全视角，看研发安全 数字化转型下的研发安全痛点

A vulnerability classified as critical was found in Mozilla Firefox and Thunderbird up to 20.0/17.0.5. This vulnerability affects the function _cairo_xlib_surface_add_glyph of the component Chrome Object Wrappers. The manipulation leads to improper access controls. This vulnerability was named CVE-2013-1670. The attack can be initiated remotely. Furthermore, there is an exploit available. It is recommended to upgrade the affected component.

A vulnerability, which was classified as problematic, was found in Wireshark up to 1.12.8/2.0.0. Affected is the function dissect_zcl_pwr_prof_pwrprofstatersp of the file epan/dissectors/packet-zbee-zcl-general.c of the component ZigBee ZCL Dissector. The manipulation leads to improper input validation. This vulnerability is traded as CVE-2015-8732. An attack has to be approached locally. Furthermore, there is an exploit available. It is recommended to upgrade the affected component.

Is the Quest for Stability an Uphill Battle in Cybersecurity? In the vast landscape of data management and cybersecurity, professionals constantly grapple with threats that lurk in the shadows, invisible and unpredictable. The elusive nature of these threats often leaves CISOs, SOC teams, and other cybersecurity professionals wondering: how can stability be achieved in a […]

The post Achieving Stability with Enhanced Secret Detection appeared first on Entro.

The post Achieving Stability with Enhanced Secret Detection appeared first on Security Boulevard.

A vulnerability classified as problematic has been found in DiscusWare Discus Freeware 3.10.4/3.10.5. Affected is an unknown function of the component Error Message Handler. The manipulation leads to basic cross site scripting. This vulnerability is traded as CVE-2006-0073. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. Furthermore, there is an exploit available.

A vulnerability was found in Linux Kernel up to 5.14.9. It has been rated as critical. This issue affects the function qeth_do_reset of the component s390. The manipulation leads to deadlock. The identification of this vulnerability is CVE-2021-47382. The attack can only be done within the local network. There is no exploit available. It is recommended to upgrade the affected component.

A vulnerability, which was classified as critical, has been found in Linux Kernel up to 5.4.150/5.10.70/5.14.9. This issue affects the function devm_i2c_new_dummy_device of the component hwmon. The manipulation leads to null pointer dereference. The identification of this vulnerability is CVE-2021-47385. The attack needs to be approached within the local network. There is no exploit available. It is recommended to upgrade the affected component.

A vulnerability has been found in Cybozu Garoon and classified as critical. Affected by this vulnerability is an unknown functionality. The manipulation of the argument uid leads to sql injection. This vulnerability is known as CVE-2006-4444. The attack can be launched remotely. Furthermore, there is an exploit available.

X0Frankenstein Claims to have Leaked the Data of Vibrant Gujarat Industrial Directory