IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) could allow a remote attacker to cause a denial of service due to allocation of resources without limits or throttling.

IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) could allow a remote authenticated attacker to perform unauthorized payment mutation actions due to missing authorization.

IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to SQL injection.

IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) 4.x is vulnerable to missing authentication on the Business Rules Manager commands REST endpoint (CommandsResource.java:31). A local actor can invoke unauthenticated commands to cause resource exhaustionand halt business-rule management functions

IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) could allow a remote authenticated attacker to falsify transaction audit logs due to improper validation of a client-supplied HTTP header.

IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) could allow a local attacker to achieve privilege escalation within the container due to improper privilege management.

IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) could allow a remote attacker to clear active chat sessions due to improper authorization.

IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) could allow a local attacker to obtain sensitive information due to insufficiently protected credentials.

IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) 4.x is vulnerable to open redirect in the PMP HostHeaderFilter (HostHeaderFilter.java:151). An unauthenticated attacker can craft a request with a manipulated Host header to redirect authenticated operators to attacker-controlled sites, enabling credential phishing.

IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) could allow a remote authenticated attacker to modify server files due to path traversal.

IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) could allow a remote authenticated attacker to bypass security controls by forging user identities due to improper authorization.

IBM Knowledge Catalog Standard Cartridge 5.0.0, 5.0.1, 5.0.2, 5.0.3, 5.1, 5.1.1, 5,1.2, 5.1.3, 5.2.0, 5.2.1 stores potentially sensitive information in log files that could be read by a local privileged user.

A vulnerability exists in F5 BIG-IP Container Ingress Services that may allow excessive permissions to read cluster secrets.

A flaw was found in glib. This vulnerability allows a heap buffer overflow and denial-of-service (DoS) via an integer overflow in GLib's GIO (GLib Input/Output) escapebytestring() function when processing malicious file or remote filesystem attribute values.

A flaw was found in grub2. The calculation of the translation buffer when reading a language .mo file in grubgettextgetstrfromposition() may overflow, leading to a Out-of-bound write. This issue can be leveraged by an attacker to overwrite grub2's sensitive heap data, eventually leading to the circumvention of secure boot protections.

IBM Robotic Process Automation 21.0.0 through 21.0.7.6 and 23.0.0 through 23.0.6 is vulnerable to client side validation bypass which could allow invalid changes or values in some fields. IBM X-Force ID: 259380.

IBM Robotic Process Automation for Cloud Pak 21.0.0 through 21.0.7.4 and 23.0.0 through 23.0.5 is vulnerable to disclosing server version information which may be used to determine software vulnerabilities at the operating system level. IBM X-Force ID: 259368.

IBM Cloud Pak for Security (CP4S) 1.7.2.0, 1.7.1.0, and 1.7.0.0 could allow an authenticated user to obtain sensitive information in HTTP responses that could be used in further attacks against the system. IBM X-Force ID: 213651.

IBM Cloud Pak - Risk Manager is 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.

It was found in OpenShift, before version 4.8, that the generated certificate for the in-cluster Service CA, incorrectly included additional certificates. The Service CA is automatically mounted into all pods, allowing them to safely connect to trusted in-cluster services that present certificates signed by the trusted Service CA. The incorrect inclusion of additional CAs in this certificate would allow an attacker that compromises any of the additional CAs to masquerade as a trusted in-cluster service.

A vulnerability was found in Red Hat Ceph Storage 4 and Red Hat Openshift Container Storage 4.2 where, A nonce reuse vulnerability was discovered in the secure mode of the messenger v2 protocol, which can allow an attacker to forge auth tags and potentially manipulate the data by leveraging the reuse of a nonce in a session. Messages encrypted using a reused nonce value are susceptible to serious confidentiality and integrity attacks.

A CSRF issue was found in OpenShift Enterprise 1.2. The web console is using 'Basic authentication' and the REST API has no CSRF attack protection mechanism. This can allow an attacker to obtain the credential and the Authorization: header when requesting the REST API via web browser.

node-connect before 2.8.1 has XSS in the Sencha Labs Connect middleware

The mirroring support (-M, --use-mirrors) in Python Pip before 1.5 uses insecure DNS querying and authenticity checks which allows attackers to perform man-in-the-middle attacks.

A content spoofing vulnerability was found in the openshift/console 3.11 and 4.x. This flaw allows an attacker to craft a URL and inject arbitrary text onto the error page that appears to be from the OpenShift instance. This attack could potentially convince a user that the inserted text is legitimate.

A flaw was found in Spring Framework, versions 5.0.x prior to 5.0.6, versions 4.3.x prior to 4.3.17, and older unsupported versions allows applications to expose STOMP over WebSocket endpoints with a simple, in-memory STOMP broker through the spring-messaging module. A malicious user (or attacker) can craft a message to the broker that can lead to a regular expression, denial of service attack.

References: https://pivotal.io/security/cve-2018-1257

Last updated 18 August 2025

It was found that log viewer for a pod doesn't properly handle terminal escape characters and automatic generation of clickable links from output, leading to XSS vulnerability.

Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Jenkins before 1.606 and LTS before 1.596.2 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via unspecified vectors, a different vulnerability than CVE-2015-1812.

For users using "'Jenkins' own user database" setting, Jenkins doesn't refuse reserved names, thus allowing privilege escalation.

External References:

https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/SECURITY/Jenkins+Security+Advisory+2015-02-27