CVE List
| Id | CVE No. | Status | Description | Phase | Votes | Comments | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 528 | CVE-1999-0531 | Candidate | ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: None. Reason: this candidate is solely about a configuration that does not directly introduce security vulnerabilities, so it is more appropriate to cover under the Common Configuration Enumeration (CCE). Notes: the former description is: "An SMTP service supports EXPN, VRFY, HELP, ESMTP, and/or EHLO." | Modified (20080731) | MODIFY(1) Frech | NOOP(1) Christey | RECAST(1) Shostack | REJECT(1) Northcutt | Shostack> I think expn != vrfy, help, esmtp. | Frech> XF:lotus-domino-esmtp-bo(4499) (also assigned to CVE-2000-0452 and | CVE-2000-1046) | XF:smtp-expn(128) | XF:smtp-vrfy(130) | XF:smtp-helo-bo(886) | XF:smtp-vrfy-bo(887) | XF:smtp-expn-bo(888) | XF:slmail-vrfyexpn-overflow(1721) | XF:smtp-ehlo(323) | | Perhaps add RCPT? If so, add XF:smtp-rcpt(1928) | Christey> XF:smtp-vrfy(130) ? | View |
| 596 | CVE-1999-0614 | Candidate | ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: None. Reason: this candidate is solely about a configuration that does not directly introduce security vulnerabilities, so it is more appropriate to cover under the Common Configuration Enumeration (CCE). Notes: the former description is: "The FTP service is running." | Modified (20080731) | ACCEPT(2) Baker, Wall | REJECT(1) Northcutt | View | |
| 597 | CVE-1999-0615 | Candidate | ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: None. Reason: this candidate is solely about a configuration that does not directly introduce security vulnerabilities, so it is more appropriate to cover under the Common Configuration Enumeration (CCE). Notes: the former description is: "The SNMP service is running." | Modified (20080731) | ACCEPT(3) Baker, Prosser, Wall | NOOP(1) Christey | REJECT(1) Northcutt | Baker> Although newer versions on snmp are not as vulnerable as prior versions, | this can still be a significant risk of exploitation, as seen in recent | attacks on snmp services via automated worms | Christey> XF:snmp(132) ? | Prosser> This fits the "exposure" description although we also know there are many vulnerabilities in SNMP. This is more of a policy/best practice issue for administrators. If you need SNMP lock it down as tight as you can, if you don"t need it, don"t run it. | View |
| 598 | CVE-1999-0616 | Candidate | ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: None. Reason: this candidate is solely about a configuration that does not directly introduce security vulnerabilities, so it is more appropriate to cover under the Common Configuration Enumeration (CCE). Notes: the former description is: "The TFTP service is running." | Modified (20080731) | ACCEPT(2) Baker, Wall | REJECT(1) Northcutt | View | |
| 599 | CVE-1999-0617 | Candidate | ** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: None. Reason: this candidate is solely about a configuration that does not directly introduce security vulnerabilities, so it is more appropriate to cover under the Common Configuration Enumeration (CCE). Notes: the former description is: "The SMTP service is running." | Modified (20080731) | ACCEPT(2) Baker, Wall | REJECT(1) Northcutt | View |
Page 20496 of 20943, showing 5 records out of 104715 total, starting on record 102476, ending on 102480
