ID CVE-2016-8514
Summary A remote information disclosure in HPE Version Control Repository Manager (VCRM) was found. The problem impacts all versions prior to 7.6.
References
Vulnerable Configurations
  • HP Version Control Repository Manager
    cpe:2.3:a:hp:version_control_repository_manager
  • HP Version Control Repository Manager 1.0.1288.1
    cpe:2.3:a:hp:version_control_repository_manager:1.0.1288.1
  • HP Version Control Repository Manager 1.0.2241.0
    cpe:2.3:a:hp:version_control_repository_manager:1.0.2241.0
  • HP Version Control Repository Manager 1.0.2289.0
    cpe:2.3:a:hp:version_control_repository_manager:1.0.2289.0
  • HP Version Control Repository Manager 1.0.2345.0
    cpe:2.3:a:hp:version_control_repository_manager:1.0.2345.0
  • HP Version Control Repository Manager 1.0.3085.0
    cpe:2.3:a:hp:version_control_repository_manager:1.0.3085.0
  • HP Version Control Repository Manager 1.0.3086.0
    cpe:2.3:a:hp:version_control_repository_manager:1.0.3086.0
  • HP Version Control Repository Manager 2.0.0.50
    cpe:2.3:a:hp:version_control_repository_manager:2.0.0.50
  • HP Version Control Repository Manager 2.0.1.30
    cpe:2.3:a:hp:version_control_repository_manager:2.0.1.30
  • HP Version Control Repository Manager 2.1.1.7.10
    cpe:2.3:a:hp:version_control_repository_manager:2.1.1.710
  • HP Version Control Repository Manager 2.1.1.720
    cpe:2.3:a:hp:version_control_repository_manager:2.1.1.720
  • HP Version Control Repository Manager 6.3.0.870
    cpe:2.3:a:hp:version_control_repository_manager:6.3.0.870
  • HP Version Control Repository Manager 7.4.0
    cpe:2.3:a:hp:version_control_repository_manager:7.4.0
CVSS
Base: 4.0
Impact:
Exploitability:
CWE CWE-200
CAPEC
  • Subverting Environment Variable Values
    The attacker directly or indirectly modifies environment variables used by or controlling the target software. The attacker's goal is to cause the target software to deviate from its expected operation in a manner that benefits the attacker.
  • Footprinting
    An attacker engages in probing and exploration activity to identify constituents and properties of the target. Footprinting is a general term to describe a variety of information gathering techniques, often used by attackers in preparation for some attack. It consists of using tools to learn as much as possible about the composition, configuration, and security mechanisms of the targeted application, system or network. Information that might be collected during a footprinting effort could include open ports, applications and their versions, network topology, and similar information. While footprinting is not intended to be damaging (although certain activities, such as network scans, can sometimes cause disruptions to vulnerable applications inadvertently) it may often pave the way for more damaging attacks.
  • Exploiting Trust in Client (aka Make the Client Invisible)
    An attack of this type exploits a programs' vulnerabilities in client/server communication channel authentication and data integrity. It leverages the implicit trust a server places in the client, or more importantly, that which the server believes is the client. An attacker executes this type of attack by placing themselves in the communication channel between client and server such that communication directly to the server is possible where the server believes it is communicating only with a valid client. There are numerous variations of this type of attack.
  • Browser Fingerprinting
    An attacker carefully crafts small snippets of Java Script to efficiently detect the type of browser the potential victim is using. Many web-based attacks need prior knowledge of the web browser including the version of browser to ensure successful exploitation of a vulnerability. Having this knowledge allows an attacker to target the victim with attacks that specifically exploit known or zero day weaknesses in the type and version of the browser used by the victim. Automating this process via Java Script as a part of the same delivery system used to exploit the browser is considered more efficient as the attacker can supply a browser fingerprinting method and integrate it with exploit code, all contained in Java Script and in response to the same web page request by the browser.
  • Session Credential Falsification through Prediction
    This attack targets predictable session ID in order to gain privileges. The attacker can predict the session ID used during a transaction to perform spoofing and session hijacking.
  • Reusing Session IDs (aka Session Replay)
    This attack targets the reuse of valid session ID to spoof the target system in order to gain privileges. The attacker tries to reuse a stolen session ID used previously during a transaction to perform spoofing and session hijacking. Another name for this type of attack is Session Replay.
  • Using Slashes in Alternate Encoding
    This attack targets the encoding of the Slash characters. An attacker would try to exploit common filtering problems related to the use of the slashes characters to gain access to resources on the target host. Directory-driven systems, such as file systems and databases, typically use the slash character to indicate traversal between directories or other container components. For murky historical reasons, PCs (and, as a result, Microsoft OSs) choose to use a backslash, whereas the UNIX world typically makes use of the forward slash. The schizophrenic result is that many MS-based systems are required to understand both forms of the slash. This gives the attacker many opportunities to discover and abuse a number of common filtering problems. The goal of this pattern is to discover server software that only applies filters to one version, but not the other.
nessus via4
  • NASL family Misc.
    NASL id HP_VERSION_CONTROL_REPO_MANAGER_7_6_0_NIX.NASL
    description According to its self-reported version, the HP Version Control Repository Manager (VCRM) application installed on the remote Linux host is prior to 7.6.0. It is, therefore, affected by multiple vulnerabilities : - A cross-site request forgery (XSRF) vulnerability exists in VCRM due to HTTP requests not requiring multiple steps, explicit confirmation, or a unique token when performing certain sensitive actions. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit this, by convincing a user into following a specially crafted link, to perform unspecified actions. (CVE-2016-8513) - An unspecified flaw exists in VCRM that allows an authenticated, remote attacker to disclose potentially sensitive information. (CVE-2016-8514) - An unspecified flaw exists in VCRM that allows an authenticated, remote attacker to upload arbitrary files. (CVE-2016-8515) 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 96722
    published 2017-01-24
    reporter Tenable
    source https://www.tenable.com/plugins/index.php?view=single&id=96722
    title HP Version Control Repository Manager for Linux < 7.6.0 Multiple Vulnerabilities
  • NASL family Windows
    NASL id HP_VERSION_CONTROL_REPO_MANAGER_7_6_0_0.NASL
    description According to its self-reported version, the HP Version Control Repository Manager (VCRM) application installed on the remote Windows host is prior to 7.6.0. It is, therefore, affected by multiple vulnerabilities : - A denial of service vulnerability exists in OpenSSL in x509_vfy.c due to improper handling of certificate revocation lists (CRLs). An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit this, via a specially crafted CRL, to cause a NULL pointer dereference, resulting in a crash of the service. (CVE-2016-7052) - A cross-site request forgery (XSRF) vulnerability exists in VCRM due to HTTP requests not requiring multiple steps, explicit confirmation, or a unique token when performing certain sensitive actions. An unauthenticated, remote attacker can exploit this, by convincing a user into following a specially crafted link, to perform unspecified actions. (CVE-2016-8513) - An unspecified flaw exists in VCRM that allows an authenticated, remote attacker to disclose potentially sensitive information. (CVE-2016-8514) - An unspecified flaw exists in VCRM that allows an authenticated, remote attacker to upload arbitrary files. (CVE-2016-8515) 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 96721
    published 2017-01-24
    reporter Tenable
    source https://www.tenable.com/plugins/index.php?view=single&id=96721
    title HP Version Control Repository Manager < 7.6.0 Multiple Vulnerabilities
refmap via4
bid 94949
confirm
sectrack 1037485
Last major update 15-02-2018 - 17:29
Published 15-02-2018 - 17:29
Last modified 06-03-2018 - 10:27
Back to Top