Vulnerabilities > Ipswitch > Imail
| DATE | CVE | VULNERABILITY TITLE | RISK |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2011-03-16 | CVE-2011-1430 | Improper Input Validation vulnerability in Ipswitch Imail The STARTTLS implementation in the server in Ipswitch IMail 11.03 and earlier does not properly restrict I/O buffering, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to insert commands into encrypted SMTP sessions by sending a cleartext command that is processed after TLS is in place, related to a "plaintext command injection" attack, a similar issue to CVE-2011-0411. | 6.8 |
| 2009-01-27 | CVE-2007-2795 | Improper Restriction of Operations Within the Bounds of A Memory Buffer vulnerability in Ipswitch Imail Multiple buffer overflows in Ipswitch IMail before 2006.21 allow remote attackers or authenticated users to execute arbitrary code via (1) the authentication feature in IMailsec.dll, which triggers heap corruption in the IMail Server, or (2) a long SUBSCRIBE IMAP command, which triggers a stack-based buffer overflow in the IMAP Daemon. | 9.0 |
| 2007-09-26 | CVE-2007-5094 | Improper Restriction of Operations Within the Bounds of A Memory Buffer vulnerability in Ipswitch Imail Heap-based buffer overflow in iaspam.dll in the SMTP Server in Ipswitch IMail Server 8.01 through 8.11 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a set of four different e-mail messages with a long boundary parameter in a certain malformed Content-Type header line, the string "MIME" by itself on a line in the header, and a long Content-Transfer-Encoding header line. | 7.5 |
| 2007-03-23 | CVE-2007-1637 | Remote Security vulnerability in Imail Premium Multiple buffer overflows in the IMAILAPILib ActiveX control (IMailAPI.dll) in Ipswitch IMail Server before 2006.2 allow remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via the (1) WebConnect and (2) Connect members in the (a) IMailServer control; (3) Sync3 and (4) Init3 members in the (b) IMailLDAPService control; and the (5) SetReplyTo member in the (c) IMailUserCollection control. | 9.3 |
| 2005-07-06 | CVE-2005-2160 | Cleartext Storage of Sensitive Information vulnerability in Ipswitch Imail 2006 IMail stores usernames and passwords in cleartext in a cookie, which allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive information. | 7.5 |
| 2005-05-25 | CVE-2005-1256 | Multiple vulnerability in Ipswitch Imail, Imail Server and Ipswitch Collaboration Suite Stack-based buffer overflow in the IMAP daemon (IMAPD32.EXE) in IMail 8.13 in Ipswitch Collaboration Suite (ICS), and other versions before IMail Server 8.2 Hotfix 2, allows remote authenticated users to execute arbitrary code via a STATUS command with a long mailbox name. | 10.0 |
| 2005-05-25 | CVE-2005-1255 | Multiple vulnerability in Ipswitch Imail, Imail Server and Ipswitch Collaboration Suite Multiple stack-based buffer overflows in the IMAP server in IMail 8.12 and 8.13 in Ipswitch Collaboration Suite (ICS), and other versions before IMail Server 8.2 Hotfix 2, allow remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a LOGIN command with (1) a long username argument or (2) a long username argument that begins with a special character. | 10.0 |
| 2005-05-25 | CVE-2005-1254 | Multiple vulnerability in Ipswitch IMail Server Stack-based buffer overflow in the IMAP server for Ipswitch IMail 8.12 and 8.13, and other versions before IMail Server 8.2 Hotfix 2, allows remote authenticated users to cause a denial of service (crash) via a SELECT command with a large argument. | 5.0 |
| 2005-05-25 | CVE-2005-1252 | Multiple vulnerability in Ipswitch IMail Server Directory traversal vulnerability in the Web Calendaring server in Ipswitch Imail 8.13, and other versions before IMail Server 8.2 Hotfix 2, allows remote attackers to read arbitrary files via "..\" (dot dot backslash) sequences in the query string argument in a GET request to a non-existent .jsp file. | 5.0 |
| 2005-05-02 | CVE-1999-1557 | Denial-Of-Service vulnerability in Ipswitch Imail 5.0 Buffer overflow in the login functions in IMAP server (imapd) in Ipswitch IMail 5.0 and earlier allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service and possibly execute arbitrary code via (1) a long user name or (2) a long password. | 5.0 |