ID CVE-2011-0013
Summary Multiple cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities in the HTML Manager Interface in Apache Tomcat 5.5 before 5.5.32, 6.0 before 6.0.30, and 7.0 before 7.0.6 allow remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML, as demonstrated via the display-name tag.
References
Vulnerable Configurations
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 7.0.0
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:7.0.0
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 7.0.1
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:7.0.1
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 7.0.2
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:7.0.2
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 7.0.3
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:7.0.3
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 7.0.4
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:7.0.4
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 7.0.5
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:7.0.5
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:6.0
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0.0
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:6.0.0
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0.1
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:6.0.1
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0.2
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:6.0.2
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0.3
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:6.0.3
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0.4
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:6.0.4
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0.5
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:6.0.5
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0.6
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:6.0.6
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0.7
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:6.0.7
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0.8
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:6.0.8
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0.9
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:6.0.9
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0.10
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:6.0.10
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0.11
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:6.0.11
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0.12
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:6.0.12
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0.13
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:6.0.13
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0.14
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:6.0.14
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0.15
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:6.0.15
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0.16
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:6.0.16
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0.17
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:6.0.17
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0.18
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:6.0.18
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0.19
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:6.0.19
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0.20
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:6.0.20
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0.24
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:6.0.24
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0.26
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:6.0.26
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0.27
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:6.0.27
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0.28
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:6.0.28
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 6.0.29
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:6.0.29
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.0
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.0
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.1
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.1
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.2
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.2
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.3
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.3
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.4
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.4
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.5
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.5
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.6
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.6
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.7
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.7
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.8
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.8
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.9
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.9
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.10
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.10
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.11
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.11
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.12
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.12
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.13
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.13
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.14
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.14
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.15
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.15
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.16
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.16
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.17
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.17
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.18
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.18
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.19
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.19
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.20
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.20
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.21
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.21
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.22
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.22
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.23
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.23
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.24
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.24
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.25
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.25
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.26
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.26
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.27
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.27
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.28
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.28
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.29
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.29
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.30
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.30
  • Apache Software Foundation Tomcat 5.5.31
    cpe:2.3:a:apache:tomcat:5.5.31
CVSS
Base: 4.3 (as of 21-02-2011 - 13:37)
Impact:
Exploitability:
CWE CWE-79
CAPEC
  • Cross Site Scripting through Log Files
    An attacker may leverage a system weakness where logs are susceptible to log injection to insert scripts into the system's logs. If these logs are later viewed by an administrator through a thin administrative interface and the log data is not properly HTML encoded before being written to the page, the attackers' scripts stored in the log will be executed in the administrative interface with potentially serious consequences. This attack pattern is really a combination of two other attack patterns: log injection and stored cross site scripting.
  • Embedding Scripts in Non-Script Elements
    This attack is a form of Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) where malicious scripts are embedded in elements that are not expected to host scripts such as image tags (<img>), comments in XML documents (< !-CDATA->), etc. These tags may not be subject to the same input validation, output validation, and other content filtering and checking routines, so this can create an opportunity for an attacker to tunnel through the application's elements and launch a XSS attack through other elements. As with all remote attacks, it is important to differentiate the ability to launch an attack (such as probing an internal network for unpatched servers) and the ability of the remote attacker to collect and interpret the output of said attack.
  • Embedding Scripts within Scripts
    An attack of this type exploits a programs' vulnerabilities that are brought on by allowing remote hosts to execute scripts. The attacker leverages this capability to execute scripts to execute his/her own script by embedding it within other scripts that the target software is likely to execute. The attacker must have the ability to inject script into script that is likely to be executed. If this is done, then the attacker can potentially launch a variety of probes and attacks against the web server's local environment, in many cases the so-called DMZ, back end resources the web server can communicate with, and other hosts. With the proliferation of intermediaries, such as Web App Firewalls, network devices, and even printers having JVMs and Web servers, there are many locales where an attacker can inject malicious scripts. Since this attack pattern defines scripts within scripts, there are likely privileges to execute said attack on the host. Of course, these attacks are not solely limited to the server side, client side scripts like Ajax and client side JavaScript can contain malicious scripts as well. In general all that is required is for there to be sufficient privileges to execute a script, but not protected against writing.
  • Cross-Site Scripting in Error Pages
    An attacker distributes a link (or possibly some other query structure) with a request to a third party web server that is malformed and also contains a block of exploit code in order to have the exploit become live code in the resulting error page. When the third party web server receives the crafted request and notes the error it then creates an error message that echoes the malformed message, including the exploit. Doing this converts the exploit portion of the message into to valid language elements that are executed by the viewing browser. When a victim executes the query provided by the attacker the infected error message error message is returned including the exploit code which then runs in the victim's browser. XSS can result in execution of code as well as data leakage (e.g. session cookies can be sent to the attacker). This type of attack is especially dangerous since the exploit appears to come from the third party web server, who the victim may trust and hence be more vulnerable to deception.
  • Cross-Site Scripting Using Alternate Syntax
    The attacker uses alternate forms of keywords or commands that result in the same action as the primary form but which may not be caught by filters. For example, many keywords are processed in a case insensitive manner. If the site's web filtering algorithm does not convert all tags into a consistent case before the comparison with forbidden keywords it is possible to bypass filters (e.g., incomplete black lists) by using an alternate case structure. For example, the "script" tag using the alternate forms of "Script" or "ScRiPt" may bypass filters where "script" is the only form tested. Other variants using different syntax representations are also possible as well as using pollution meta-characters or entities that are eventually ignored by the rendering engine. The attack can result in the execution of otherwise prohibited functionality.
  • Cross-Site Scripting Using MIME Type Mismatch
    An attacker creates a file with scripting content but where the specified MIME type of the file is such that scripting is not expected. Some browsers will detect that the specified MIME type of the file does not match the actual type of the content and will automatically switch to using an interpreter for the real content type. If the browser does not invoke script filters before doing this, the attackers' script may run on the target unsanitized. For example, the MIME type text/plain may be used where the actual content is text/javascript or text/html. Since text does not contain scripting instructions, the stated MIME type would indicate that filtering is unnecessary. However, if the target application subsequently determines the file's real type and invokes the appropriate interpreter, scripted content could be invoked. In another example, img tags in HTML content could reference a renderable type file instead of an expected image file. The file extension and MIME type can describe an image file, but the file content can be text/javascript or text/html resulting in script execution. If the browser assumes all references in img tags are images, and therefore do not need to be filtered for scripts, this would bypass content filters. In a cross-site scripting attack, the attacker tricks the victim into accessing a URL that uploads a script file with an incorrectly specified MIME type. If the victim's browser switches to the appropriate interpreter without filtering, the attack will execute as a standard XSS attack, possibly revealing the victim's cookies or executing arbitrary script in their browser.
  • Cross-Site Scripting in Attributes
    The attacker inserts commands to perform cross-site scripting (XSS) actions in HTML attributes. Many filters do not adequately sanitize attributes against the presence of potentially dangerous commands even if they adequately sanitize tags. For example, dangerous expressions could be inserted into a style attribute in an anchor tag, resulting in the execution of malicious code when the resulting page is rendered. If a victim is tricked into viewing the rendered page the attack proceeds like a normal XSS attack, possibly resulting in the loss of sensitive cookies or other malicious activities.
  • Cross-Site Scripting via Encoded URI Schemes
    An attack of this type exploits the ability of most browsers to interpret "data", "javascript" or other URI schemes as client-side executable content placeholders. This attack consists of passing a malicious URI in an anchor tag HREF attribute or any other similar attributes in other HTML tags. Such malicious URI contains, for example, a base64 encoded HTML content with an embedded cross-site scripting payload. The attack is executed when the browser interprets the malicious content i.e., for example, when the victim clicks on the malicious link.
  • Cross-Site Scripting Using Doubled Characters, e.g. %3C%3Cscript
    The attacker bypasses input validation by using doubled characters in order to perform a cross-site scripting attack. Some filters fail to recognize dangerous sequences if they are preceded by repeated characters. For example, by doubling the < before a script command, (<<script or %3C%3script using URI encoding) the filters of some web applications may fail to recognize the presence of a script tag. If the targeted server is vulnerable to this type of bypass, the attacker can create a crafted URL or other trap to cause a victim to view a page on the targeted server where the malicious content is executed, as per a normal XSS attack.
  • Cross-Site Scripting Using Flash
    An attacker injects malicious script to global parameters in a Flash movie via a crafted URL. The malicious script is executed in the context of the Flash movie. As such, this is a form of Cross-Site Scripting (XSS), but the abilities granted to the Flash movie make this attack more flexible.
  • Cross-Site Scripting with Masking through Invalid Characters in Identifiers
    The attacker inserts invalid characters in identifiers to bypass application filtering of input. Filters may not scan beyond invalid characters but during later stages of processing content that follows these invalid characters may still be processed. This allows the attacker to sneak prohibited commands past filters and perform normally prohibited operations. Invalid characters may include null, carriage return, line feed or tab in an identifier. Successful bypassing of the filter can result in a XSS attack, resulting in the disclosure of web cookies or possibly other results.
  • Embedding Scripts in HTTP Query Strings
    A variant of cross-site scripting called "reflected" cross-site scripting, the HTTP Query Strings attack consists of passing a malicious script inside an otherwise valid HTTP request query string. This is of significant concern for sites that rely on dynamic, user-generated content such as bulletin boards, news sites, blogs, and web enabled administration GUIs. The malicious script may steal session data, browse history, probe files, or otherwise execute attacks on the client side. Once the attacker has prepared the malicious HTTP query it is sent to a victim user (perhaps by email, IM, or posted on an online forum), who clicks on a normal looking link that contains a poison query string. This technique can be made more effective through the use of services like http://tinyurl.com/, which makes very small URLs that will redirect to very large, complex ones. The victim will not know what he is really clicking on.
  • Simple Script Injection
    An attacker embeds malicious scripts in content that will be served to web browsers. The goal of the attack is for the target software, the client-side browser, to execute the script with the users' privilege level. An attack of this type exploits a programs' vulnerabilities that are brought on by allowing remote hosts to execute code and scripts. Web browsers, for example, have some simple security controls in place, but if a remote attacker is allowed to execute scripts (through injecting them in to user-generated content like bulletin boards) then these controls may be bypassed. Further, these attacks are very difficult for an end user to detect.
  • AJAX Fingerprinting
    This attack utilizes the frequent client-server roundtrips in Ajax conversation to scan a system. While Ajax does not open up new vulnerabilities per se, it does optimize them from an attacker point of view. In many XSS attacks the attacker must get a "hole in one" and successfully exploit the vulnerability on the victim side the first time, once the client is redirected the attacker has many chances to engage in follow on probes, but there is only one first chance. In a widely used web application this is not a major problem because 1 in a 1,000 is good enough in a widely used application. A common first step for an attacker is to footprint the environment to understand what attacks will work. Since footprinting relies on enumeration, the conversational pattern of rapid, multiple requests and responses that are typical in Ajax applications enable an attacker to look for many vulnerabilities, well-known ports, network locations and so on.
  • Embedding Script (XSS) in HTTP Headers
    An attack of this type exploits web applications that generate web content, such as links in a HTML page, based on unvalidated or improperly validated data submitted by other actors. XSS in HTTP Headers attacks target the HTTP headers which are hidden from most users and may not be validated by web applications.
  • XSS in IMG Tags
    Image tags are an often overlooked, but convenient, means for a Cross Site Scripting attack. The attacker can inject script contents into an image (IMG) tag in order to steal information from a victim's browser and execute malicious scripts.
Access
VectorComplexityAuthentication
NETWORK MEDIUM NONE
Impact
ConfidentialityIntegrityAvailability
NONE PARTIAL NONE
nessus via4
  • NASL family Web Servers
    NASL id TOMCAT_5_5_32.NASL
    description According to its self-reported version number, the instance of Apache Tomcat 5.5.x listening on the remote host is prior to 5.5.32. It is, therefore, affected by a cross-site scripting vulnerability in its HTML Manager interface. An input validation error exists in the HTML Manager interface of Tomcat that may allow a remote attacker to inject code into a user's browser via a crafted URL. Note that Nessus has not tested for this issue but has instead relied only on the application's self-reported version number.
    last seen 2019-02-21
    modified 2018-08-01
    plugin id 51957
    published 2011-02-11
    reporter Tenable
    source https://www.tenable.com/plugins/index.php?view=single&id=51957
    title Apache Tomcat 5.5.x < 5.5.32 HTML Manager Interface XSS
  • NASL family Web Servers
    NASL id TOMCAT_7_0_6.NASL
    description According to its self-reported version number, the instance of Apache Tomcat 7.x listening on the remote host is prior to 7.0.6. It is, therefore, affected by a cross-site scripting vulnerability in its HTML Manager interface. A remote attacker can exploit this to inject code into a user's browser via a crafted URL. Note that Nessus has not tested for this issue but has instead relied only on the application's self-reported version number.
    last seen 2019-02-21
    modified 2018-11-15
    plugin id 51976
    published 2011-02-14
    reporter Tenable
    source https://www.tenable.com/plugins/index.php?view=single&id=51976
    title Apache Tomcat 7.x < 7.0.6 Manager Interface XSS
  • NASL family FreeBSD Local Security Checks
    NASL id FREEBSD_PKG_553EC4ED38D611E094B1000C29BA66D2.NASL
    description The Tomcat security team reports : The HTML Manager interface displayed web application provided data, such as display names, without filtering. A malicious web application could trigger script execution by an administrative user when viewing the manager pages.
    last seen 2019-02-21
    modified 2018-11-10
    plugin id 51991
    published 2011-02-16
    reporter Tenable
    source https://www.tenable.com/plugins/index.php?view=single&id=51991
    title FreeBSD : tomcat -- XSS vulnerability (553ec4ed-38d6-11e0-94b1-000c29ba66d2)
  • NASL family Gentoo Local Security Checks
    NASL id GENTOO_GLSA-201206-24.NASL
    description The remote host is affected by the vulnerability described in GLSA-201206-24 (Apache Tomcat: Multiple vulnerabilities) Multiple vulnerabilities have been discovered in Apache Tomcat. Please review the CVE identifiers referenced below for details. Impact : The vulnerabilities allow an attacker to cause a Denial of Service, to hijack a session, to bypass authentication, to inject webscript, to enumerate valid usernames, to read, modify and overwrite arbitrary files, to bypass intended access restrictions, to delete work-directory files, to discover the server’s hostname or IP, to bypass read permissions for files or HTTP headers, to read or write files outside of the intended working directory, and to obtain sensitive information by reading a log file. Workaround : There is no known workaround at this time.
    last seen 2019-02-21
    modified 2018-07-11
    plugin id 59677
    published 2012-06-25
    reporter Tenable
    source https://www.tenable.com/plugins/index.php?view=single&id=59677
    title GLSA-201206-24 : Apache Tomcat: Multiple vulnerabilities
  • NASL family Mandriva Local Security Checks
    NASL id MANDRIVA_MDVSA-2011-030.NASL
    description Multiple vulnerabilities has been found and corrected in tomcat5 : When running under a SecurityManager, access to the file system is limited but web applications are granted read/write permissions to the work directory. This directory is used for a variety of temporary files such as the intermediate files generated when compiling JSPs to Servlets. The location of the work directory is specified by a ServletContect attribute that is meant to be read-only to web applications. However, due to a coding error, the read-only setting was not applied. Therefore, a malicious web application may modify the attribute before Tomcat applies the file permissions. This can be used to grant read/write permissions to any area on the file system which a malicious web application may then take advantage of. This vulnerability is only applicable when hosting web applications from untrusted sources such as shared hosting environments (CVE-2010-3718). The HTML Manager interface displayed web application provided data, such as display names, without filtering. A malicious web application could trigger script execution by an administrative user when viewing the manager pages (CVE-2011-0013). Packages for 2009.0 are provided as of the Extended Maintenance Program. Please visit this link to learn more: http://store.mandriva.com/product_info.php?cPath=149 products_id=490 The updated packages have been patched to correct these issues.
    last seen 2019-02-21
    modified 2019-01-02
    plugin id 52035
    published 2011-02-20
    reporter Tenable
    source https://www.tenable.com/plugins/index.php?view=single&id=52035
    title Mandriva Linux Security Advisory : tomcat5 (MDVSA-2011:030)
  • NASL family SuSE Local Security Checks
    NASL id SUSE_TOMCAT5-7337.NASL
    description This tomcat6 update fixes : - CVE-2010-3718: CVSS v2 Base Score: 4.0 (AV:N/AC:H/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:N): Design Error (CWE-DesignError) - CVE-2011-0013: CVSS v2 Base Score: 4.3 (AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N): XSS (CWE-79)
    last seen 2019-02-21
    modified 2016-12-22
    plugin id 52525
    published 2011-03-03
    reporter Tenable
    source https://www.tenable.com/plugins/index.php?view=single&id=52525
    title SuSE 10 Security Update : Tomcat (ZYPP Patch Number 7337)
  • NASL family Web Servers
    NASL id TOMCAT_6_0_30.NASL
    description According to its self-reported version number, the instance of Apache Tomcat 6.0.x listening on the remote host is prior to 6.0.30. It is, therefore, affected by multiple vulnerabilities : - An error in the access restriction on a 'ServletContext' attribute that holds the location of the work directory in Tomcat's SecurityManager. A malicious web application can modify the location of the working directory which then allows improper read and write access to arbitrary files and directories in the context of Tomcat. (CVE-2010-3718) - An input validation error exists in the Manager application in that it fails to filter the 'sort' and 'orderBy' input parameters. (CVE-2010-4172) - The default configuration does not include the HTTPOnly flag in a Set-Cookie header, which makes it easier for remote attackers to hijack a session via script access to a cookie. (CVE-2010-4312) - An input validation error exists in the HTML manager application in that it fails to filter various input data before returning it to the browser. (CVE-2011-0013) Note that Nessus has not tested for these issues but has instead relied only on the application's self-reported version number.
    last seen 2019-02-21
    modified 2018-11-15
    plugin id 51975
    published 2011-02-14
    reporter Tenable
    source https://www.tenable.com/plugins/index.php?view=single&id=51975
    title Apache Tomcat 6.0.x < 6.0.30 Multiple Vulnerabilities
  • NASL family SuSE Local Security Checks
    NASL id SUSE9_12687.NASL
    description - Apache Tomcat Local bypass of security manger file permissions. (CVE-2010-3718) - Apache Tomcat Manager XSS vulnerability. (CVE-2011-0013)
    last seen 2019-02-21
    modified 2018-11-15
    plugin id 52711
    published 2011-03-18
    reporter Tenable
    source https://www.tenable.com/plugins/index.php?view=single&id=52711
    title SuSE9 Security Update : Tomcat (YOU Patch Number 12687)
  • NASL family Scientific Linux Local Security Checks
    NASL id SL_20111220_TOMCAT5_ON_SL5_X.NASL
    description Apache Tomcat is a servlet container for the Java Servlet and JavaServer Pages (JSP) technologies. It was found that web applications could modify the location of the Tomcat host's work directory. As web applications deployed on Tomcat have read and write access to this directory, a malicious web application could use this flaw to trick Tomcat into giving it read and write access to an arbitrary directory on the file system. (CVE-2010-3718) A cross-site scripting (XSS) flaw was found in the Manager application, used for managing web applications on Apache Tomcat. A malicious web application could use this flaw to conduct an XSS attack, leading to arbitrary web script execution with the privileges of victims who are logged into and viewing Manager application web pages. (CVE-2011-0013) Multiple flaws were found in the way Tomcat handled HTTP DIGEST authentication. These flaws weakened the Tomcat HTTP DIGEST authentication implementation, subjecting it to some of the weaknesses of HTTP BASIC authentication, for example, allowing remote attackers to perform session replay attacks. (CVE-2011-1184) A flaw was found in the Tomcat MemoryUserDatabase. If a runtime exception occurred when creating a new user with a JMX client, that user's password was logged to Tomcat log files. Note: By default, only administrators have access to such log files. (CVE-2011-2204) Users of Tomcat should upgrade to these updated packages, which contain backported patches to correct these issues. Tomcat must be restarted for this update to take effect.
    last seen 2019-02-21
    modified 2018-12-31
    plugin id 61211
    published 2012-08-01
    reporter Tenable
    source https://www.tenable.com/plugins/index.php?view=single&id=61211
    title Scientific Linux Security Update : tomcat5 on SL5.x i386/x86_64
  • NASL family Scientific Linux Local Security Checks
    NASL id