ghsa-xwjm-m85h-4ff8
Vulnerability from github
Published
2022-04-29 02:58
Modified
2022-04-29 02:58
Details

Multiple integer overflows in xpdf 3.0, and other packages that use xpdf code such as CUPS, allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service (crash) and possibly execute arbitrary code, a different set of vulnerabilities than those identified by CVE-2004-0888.

Show details on source website


{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2004-0889"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2005-01-27T05:00:00Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "Multiple integer overflows in xpdf 3.0, and other packages that use xpdf code such as CUPS, allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service (crash) and possibly execute arbitrary code, a different set of vulnerabilities than those identified by CVE-2004-0888.",
  "id": "GHSA-xwjm-m85h-4ff8",
  "modified": "2022-04-29T02:58:32Z",
  "published": "2022-04-29T02:58:32Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2004-0889"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/17819"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://marc.info/?l=bugtraq\u0026m=109880927526773\u0026w=2"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.gentoo.org/security/en/glsa/glsa-200410-20.xml"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.gentoo.org/security/en/glsa/glsa-200410-30.xml"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.mandriva.com/security/advisories?name=MDKSA-2004:113"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/11501"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": []
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Sightings

Author Source Type Date

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
  • Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.