Apache Tomcat 4.0.3 for Windows allows remote attackers to obtain the web root path via an HTTP request for a resource that does not exist, such as lpt9, which leaks the information in an error message.
Apache Tomcat 4.0.1 allows remote attackers to obtain the web root path via HTTP requests for JSP files preceded by (1) +/, (2) >/, (3) </, and (4) %20/, which leaks the pathname in an error message.
Tomcat 4.0 through 4.1.12, using mod_jk 1.2.1 module on Apache 1.3 through 1.3.27, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (desynchronized communications) via an HTTP GET request with a Transfer-Encoding chunked field with invalid values.
The default servlet (org.apache.catalina.servlets.DefaultServlet) in Tomcat 4.0.4 and 4.1.10 and earlier allows remote attackers to read source code for server files via a direct request to the servlet.
Apache Tomcat 4.0.3, and possibly other versions before 4.1.3 beta, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (resource exhaustion) via a large number of requests to the server with null characters, which causes the working threads to hang.
The Java Server Pages (JSP) engine in Tomcat allows web page owners to cause a denial of service (engine crash) on the web server via a JSP page that calls WPrinterJob().pageSetup(null,null).
Apache Tomcat may be started without proper security settings if errors are encountered while reading the web.xml file, which could allow attackers to bypass intended restrictions.
Cross-site scripting vulnerability in Apache Tomcat 4.0.3 allows remote attackers to execute script as other web users via script in a URL with the /servlet/ mapping, which does not filter the script when an exception is thrown by the servlet.
Directory traversal vulnerability in source.jsp of Apache Tomcat before 3.1 allows remote attackers to read arbitrary files via a .. (dot dot) in the argument to source.jsp.
Unknown vulnerability in Tomcat 3.2.1 running on HP Secure OS for Linux 1.0 allows attackers to access servlet resources. NOTE: due to the vagueness of the vendor advisory, it is not clear whether this issue is already covered by other CVE identifiers.