A flaw was found in libsoup. When the permessage-deflate WebSocket extension compresses a very large outgoing message, truncated size calculations used for GByteArray growth could wrap, causing zlib to write past the allocated buffer and resulting in a heap buffer overflow.

A flaw was found in libsoup. When constructing a masked WebSocket client frame for a very large outgoing payload, size values passed to GByteArray allocation APIs could be truncated while the masking routine still used the full length, causing a heap buffer overflow.

A flaw was found in libsoup. When max-incoming-payload-size is unlimited (0), SoupWebsocketConnection could grow its incoming GByteArray based on an attacker-controlled frame length until the length wrapped, causing a heap buffer overflow while reading frame data.

A flaw was found in libsoup. When reassembling fragmented WebSocket messages into a GByteArray, libsoup did not adequately cap total message size against the limits of the underlying buffer type. A remote peer could send fragments that caused size truncation while the implementation still used the full length, leading to heap corruption or a crash.

A flaw was found in libsoup. When handling an incoming WebSocket Pong frame, SoupWebsocketConnection emitted the ::pong signal with a GByteArray pointer even though the signal is declared to pass a GBytes. Applications connecting a handler that follows the documented GBytes API can trigger heap corruption or a crash upon receiving a crafted Pong.

A flaw was found in libsoup. The soupuridecodedatauri() function incorrectly treated base64 data-URI payloads as NUL-terminated strings when calling gbase64decodeinplace(). If the percent-decoded payload contained embedded NUL bytes, the decoded length could remain uninitialized and be used as the size of the returned GBytes. This can lead to an out-of-bounds read or application crash when processing a crafted data URI.

IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) could allow a remote attacker to perform unauthorized actions due to improper configuration of HTTP method-based security constraints.

IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) could allow a remote attacker to obtain sensitive information due to cleartext transmission of sensitive information.

IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) could allow a remote attacker to cause a denial of service due to the improper use of reflection with externally controlled input.

IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) could allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper deserialization of untrusted data.

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 attacker to execute arbitrary code due to improper neutralization of user-controlled input within the new Function constructor.

IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) could allow a remote attacker to manipulate database queries due to improper neutralization of special elements in a boolean expression.

IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) could allow a remote attacker to obtain sensitive information due to the use of a hard-coded or predictable cryptographic key.

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

IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) could allow a local attacker to obtain sensitive information and trigger unauthorized actions due to server-side request forgery.

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) could allow a local attacker to gain unauthorized access to sensitive information and modify transaction data due to the use of hard-coded credentials.

IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) could allow a remote attacker to obtain sensitive information due to improper restriction of XML external entity references.

IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) could allow a remote attacker to read arbitrary files due to improper path canonicalization.

IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) could allow a remote attacker to obtain sensitive information due to cleartext transmission of sensitive information.

IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) could allow a remote authenticated attacker to gain elevated privileges due to improper privilege management.

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

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 local attacker to execute arbitrary commands due to the inclusion of functionality from an untrusted control sphere.

IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) could allow a remote authenticated attacker to obtain sensitive information due to improper restriction of XML external entity references.

IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) could allow a remote attacker to perform unauthorized actions due to improper authentication and missing authorization.

IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) could allow a remote attacker to access sensitive information and modify system configurations due to missing authentication for a critical function.

IBM Financial Transaction Manager (FTM) could allow a remote attacker to execute arbitrary ESQL commands due to improper neutralization of special elements used in an ESQL command.