Total
336347 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v2 | CVSS v3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2009-1927 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: The CNA or individual who requested this candidate did not associate it with any vulnerability during 2009. Notes: none
|
|||||
| CVE-2009-1921 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: The CNA or individual who requested this candidate did not associate it with any vulnerability during 2009. Notes: none
|
|||||
| CVE-2009-1871 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: The CNA or individual who requested this candidate did not associate it with any vulnerability during 2009. Notes: none
|
|||||
| CVE-2009-1676 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2009-1535. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2009-1535. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2009-1535 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usage
|
|||||
| CVE-2009-1563 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2009-0689. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2009-0689. Certain codebase relationships were not originally clear. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2009-0689 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usage
|
|||||
| CVE-2009-1543 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: The CNA or individual who requested this candidate did not associate it with any vulnerability during 2009. Notes: none
|
|||||
| CVE-2009-1541 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: The CNA or individual who requested this candidate did not associate it with any vulnerability during 2009. Notes: none
|
|||||
| CVE-2009-1540 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: The CNA or individual who requested this candidate did not associate it with any vulnerability during 2009. Notes: none
|
|||||
| CVE-2009-1205 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2007-4475. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2007-4475. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2007-4475 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usage
|
|||||
| CVE-2009-1193 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was withdrawn by its CNA. Further investigation showed that it was not a security issue. Notes: none
|
|||||
| CVE-2009-1153 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: The CNA or individual who requested this candidate did not associate it with any vulnerability during 2009. Notes: none
|
|||||
| CVE-2009-0907 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2009-1899. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2009-1899. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2009-1899 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usage
|
|||||
| CVE-2009-0797 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was withdrawn by its CNA. Further investigation showed that it was not a security issue. Notes: none
|
|||||
| CVE-2009-0795 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2009-0796, CVE-2009-1265. Reason: this candidate was intended for one issue, but a typo caused it to be associated with a different issue. Notes: All CVE users should consult CVE-2009-0796 and CVE-2009-1265 to determine which ID is appropriate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usage
|
|||||
| CVE-2009-0786 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This was originally intended for a report about TCP Wrappers and the hosts_ctl API function, but further investigation showed that this was documented behavior by that function. Notes: Future CVE identifiers might be assigned to applications that mis-use the API in a security-relevant fashion.
|
|||||
| CVE-2009-0785 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was in a CNA pool that was not assigned to any issues during 2009. Notes: none
|
|||||
| CVE-2009-0782 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was withdrawn by its CNA. Further investigation showed that it was not a security issue. Notes: none
|
|||||
| CVE-2009-0671 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: Format string vulnerability in the University of Washington (UW) c-client library, as used by the UW IMAP toolkit imap-2007d and other applications, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via format string specifiers in the initial request to the IMAP port (143/tcp). NOTE: Red Hat has disputed the vulnerability, stating "The Red Hat Security Response Team have been unable to confirm the existence of this format string vulnerability in the toolkit, and the sample publ ...
Show More |
|||||
| CVE-2009-0589 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was withdrawn by its CNA. Further investigation showed that it was not a security issue. Notes: none
|
|||||
| CVE-2009-0567 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: The CNA or individual who requested this candidate did not associate it with any vulnerability during 2009. Notes: none
|
|||||
| CVE-2009-0300 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2006-2636. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2006-2636. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2006-2636 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usage
|
|||||
| CVE-2009-0242 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: gmetad in Ganglia 3.1.1, when supporting multiple requests per connection on an interactive port, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service via a request to the gmetad service with a path that does not exist, which causes Ganglia to (1) perform excessive CPU computation and (2) send the entire tree, which consumes network bandwidth. NOTE: the vendor and original researcher have disputed this issue, since legitimate requests can generate the same amount of resource co ...
Show More |
|||||
| CVE-2009-0236 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: The CNA or individual who requested this candidate did not associate it with any vulnerability during 2009. Notes: none
|
|||||
| CVE-2009-0190 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2009-1016. Reason: This candidate is a reservation duplicate of CVE-2009-1016. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2009-1016 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usage
|
|||||
| CVE-2009-0189 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2009-1012. Reason: This candidate is a reservation duplicate of CVE-2009-1012. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2009-1012 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usage
|
|||||
| CVE-2009-0101 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: The CNA or individual who requested this candidate did not associate it with any vulnerability during 2009. Notes: none
|
|||||
| CVE-2009-0092 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: The CNA or individual who requested this candidate did not associate it with any vulnerability during 2009. Notes: none
|
|||||
| CVE-2009-0074 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: The CNA or individual who requested this candidate did not associate it with any vulnerability during 2009. Notes: none
|
|||||
| CVE-2009-0073 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: The CNA or individual who requested this candidate did not associate it with any vulnerability during 2009. Notes: none
|
|||||
| CVE-2008-7308 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was withdrawn by its CNA. Notes: none
|
|||||
| CVE-2008-7307 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was withdrawn by its CNA. Notes: none
|
|||||
| CVE-2008-7306 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was withdrawn by its CNA. Notes: none
|
|||||
| CVE-2008-7305 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was withdrawn by its CNA. Notes: none
|
|||||
| CVE-2008-7304 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was withdrawn by its CNA. Notes: none
|
|||||
| CVE-2008-7260 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: This candidate is unused by its CNA.
|
|||||
| CVE-2008-7259 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: This candidate is unused by its CNA.
|
|||||
| CVE-2008-6800 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: None. Reason: this candidate is not a security issue. It was originally created based on one vendor's misinterpretation of an upstream changelog comment that referred to a race condition in the winbind daemon (aka winbindd) in Samba before 3.0.32. The upstream vendor states: "The Samba Team sees no way to exploit this race condition by a user of the system or an external attacker. In order to be able to trigger the race condition ...
Show More |
|||||
| CVE-2008-6628 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2008-6268. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2008-6268. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2008-6268 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usage
|
|||||
| CVE-2008-6432 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2007-6432. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2007-6432. A typo caused the wrong ID to be used. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2007-6432 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usage
|
|||||
| CVE-2008-6426 | 2023-11-07 | N/A | N/A | ||
|
Rejected reason: DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2007-6426. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2007-6426. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2007-6426 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidental usage
|
|||||