Vulnerabilities > IBM > Domino
DATE | CVE | VULNERABILITY TITLE | RISK |
---|---|---|---|
2017-02-01 | CVE-2016-2938 | Cross-site Scripting vulnerability in IBM Domino and Inotes IBM iNotes is vulnerable to cross-site scripting. | 6.1 |
2016-06-29 | CVE-2016-0304 | Improper Access Control vulnerability in IBM Domino The Java Console in IBM Domino 8.5.x before 8.5.3 FP6 IF13 and 9.x before 9.0.1 FP6, when a certain unsupported configuration involving UNC share pathnames is used, allows remote attackers to bypass authentication and possibly execute arbitrary code via unspecified vectors, aka SPR KLYHA7MM3J. | 8.1 |
2016-06-26 | CVE-2016-0301 | Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer vulnerability in IBM Domino Heap-based buffer overflow in the KeyView PDF filter in IBM Domino 8.5.x before 8.5.3 FP6 IF13 and 9.x before 9.0.1 FP6 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted PDF document, a different vulnerability than CVE-2016-0277, CVE-2016-0278, and CVE-2016-0279. | 7.8 |
2016-06-26 | CVE-2016-0279 | Improper Access Control vulnerability in IBM Domino Heap-based buffer overflow in the KeyView PDF filter in IBM Domino 8.5.x before 8.5.3 FP6 IF13 and 9.x before 9.0.1 FP6 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted PDF document, a different vulnerability than CVE-2016-0277, CVE-2016-0278, and CVE-2016-0301. | 7.8 |
2016-06-26 | CVE-2016-0278 | Improper Access Control vulnerability in IBM Domino Heap-based buffer overflow in the KeyView PDF filter in IBM Domino 8.5.x before 8.5.3 FP6 IF13 and 9.x before 9.0.1 FP6 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted PDF document, a different vulnerability than CVE-2016-0277, CVE-2016-0279, and CVE-2016-0301. | 7.8 |
2016-06-26 | CVE-2016-0277 | Improper Access Control vulnerability in IBM Domino Heap-based buffer overflow in the KeyView PDF filter in IBM Domino 8.5.x before 8.5.3 FP6 IF13 and 9.x before 9.0.1 FP6 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted PDF document, a different vulnerability than CVE-2016-0278, CVE-2016-0279, and CVE-2016-0301. | 7.8 |