Tag Archives: Squid

June Linux Patch Wednesday

June Linux Patch Wednesday

June Linux Patch Wednesday. A total of 1,888 vulnerabilities (324 in the Linux kernel, and a whopping 728 in Chromium ❗️). For comparison, there were 1,638 vulnerabilities in May. The increase isn't as dramatic as it was from April to May, but it's still a new record. One of the vulnerabilities has been flagged as actively exploited in the wild:

🔻 RCE - Chromium (CVE-2026-11645). Chromium is the open-source web browser project that serves as the foundation for many modern browsers, including Google Chrome, Microsoft Edge, Brave, Opera, and Vivaldi. A publicly available Metasploit module exploits a vulnerability in the web browser's V8 JavaScript engine. The vulnerability is triggered by a specific code pattern that causes type confusion between internal V8 objects, resulting in out-of-bounds memory access. Successful exploitation may lead to remote code execution in the context of the browser process.

There are also 109 vulnerabilities with public exploits or evidence that exploits exist, although there are no signs of active exploitation in real-world attacks yet. Among them, the following stand out:

🔸 EoP - Linux Kernel "CIFSwitch" (CVE-2026-46243). This vulnerability could allow attackers to forge CIFS authentication key descriptions, abuse the kernel's key request mechanism, and gain root privileges.

🔸 EoP - Linux Kernel "PinTheft" (CVE-2026-43494). On a successfully exploited configuration, the chain completes and hands off to the discovered SUID binary with an overwritten first page - yielding a root shell if the race and kernel state align.

🔸 RCE - Apache ActiveMQ (CVE-2026-42588). ActiveMQ is an open-source message broker written in Java. Exploitation of this vulnerability requires valid credentials for the ActiveMQ Web Console. However, the default credentials are admin/admin.

🔸 InfDisc - Squid "Squidbleed" (CVE-2026-47729). Squid is an open-source caching proxy server. The vulnerability causes Squid's FTP parser to read beyond the boundary of a memory buffer, into a region that may contain a previous user's uncleared HTTP request data.

🔸 AuthBypass - Nextcloud (CVE-2026-45156). Nextcloud is an open source content collaboration platform. A missing signature verification in User OIDC allowed a malicious ID4me authority to identify as any user.

🔸 XSS - Nextcloud (CVE-2025-59788). A vulnerability in a reachable files_pdfviewer example directory in Nextcloud allows attackers to execute arbitrary JavaScript in the context of a user's browser via a crafted PDF file to viewer.html.

🔸 XSS - Roundcube (CVE-2026-48849). Roundcube is a free, open-source webmail application. An unsanitized subject field in the draft restored value could lead to stored XSS/HTML/CSS injection on shared mailboxes.

🔸 DoS - ImageMagick (CVE-2026-46522). ImageMagick is an open-source image processing tool used to create, edit, and convert images. Due to a missing check in the MIFF decoder, a crafted file could cause an infinite loop resulting in CPU exhaustion.

🗒 Full Vulristics report

November Linux Patch Wednesday

November Linux Patch Wednesday

November Linux Patch Wednesday. In November, Linux vendors began fixing 516 vulnerabilities, one and a half times fewer than in October. Of these, 232 are in the Linux Kernel. One vulnerability is exploited in the wild:

🔻 MemCor - Chromium (CVE-2025-13223). Added to CISA KEV on November 19.

For 64 more vulnerabilities, public or suspected exploits exist. Notable ones:

🔸 RCE - Samba (CVE-2025-10230), Apache Tomcat (CVE-2025-55752), NVIDIA Container Toolkit (CVE-2024-0132, CVE-2025-23359), Lasso (CVE-2025-47151), QuickJS (CVE-2025-62494), Keras (CVE-2025-9905)
🔸 SQLi - Django (CVE-2025-64459)
🔸 InfDisc - Webmin (CVE-2024-44762), Squid (CVE-2025-62168), BIND (CVE-2025-31133), QuickJS (CVE-2025-62492, CVE-2025-62493)
🔸 SFB - BIND (CVE-2025-40778)
🔸 AuthBypass - Webmin (CVE-2025-61541)
🔸 MemCor - Suricata (CVE-2025-59150)

🗒 Full Vulristics report

На русском

October 2023: back to Positive Technologies, Vulristics updates, Linux Patch Wednesday, Microsoft Patch Tuesday, PhysTech VM lecture

October 2023: back to Positive Technologies, Vulristics updates, Linux Patch Wednesday, Microsoft Patch Tuesday, PhysTech VM lecture. Hello everyone! October was an interesting and busy month for me. I started a new job, worked on my open source Vulristics project, and analyzed vulnerabilities using it. Especially Linux vulnerabilities as part of my new Linux Patch Wednesday project. And, of course, analyzed Microsoft Patch Tuesday as well. In addition, at the end of October I was a guest lecturer at MIPT/PhysTech university. But first thing first.

Alternative video link (for Russia): https://vk.com/video-149273431_456239138

Continue reading

Vulnerability Management for Network Perimeter

Vulnerability Management for Network Perimeter. Network Perimeter is like a door to your organization. It is accessible to everyone and vulnerability exploitation does not require any human interactions, unlike, for example, phishing attacks. Potential attacker can automate most of his actions searching for an easy target. It’s important not to be such of target. 😉

Vulnerability Management for Network Perimeter

What does it mean to control the network perimeter? Well, practically this process consist of two main parts:

  • Assessing network hosts that are facing Internet using some Network Scanner (Nessus, OpenVAS, Qualys, MaxPatrol. F-Secure Radar, etc.)
  • Assessing application servers, e.g. Web Servers, on these hosts using some special tools, e.g. Web Application Scanners (Acunetix, Burp Suite, Qualys WAS, Tenable.io WAS, High-Tech Bridge ImmuniWeb, etc.)

Active scanning is a good method of perimeter assessment. Dynamics of the assets is relatively low, comparing with the Office Network. Perimeter hosts usually stays active all the time, including the time when you are going to scan scanning them. 😉

Most of the dangerous vulnerabilities can be detected without authorization: problems with encryption (OpenSSL Heartbleed, Poodle, etc.). RCE and DoS of web servers and frameworks (Apache Struts and Equifax case)

The best results can be achieved with scanners deployed outside of your network. Thus, you will see your Network Perimeter the same way a potential attacker sees it. But certainly, you will be in a better position:

  • You can ask your IT administrators to add your network and WAS scanners in white list, so they will not be banned.
  • You can check and correlate scan results of remote scanner with (authenticated?) scan results produced by the scanner deployed in your organization’s network and thus filtering false positives.

What about the targets for scanning? How should you get them?

Continue reading