Insufficient policy enforcement in full screen in Google Chrome prior to 81.0.4044.92 allowed a remote attacker to spoof security UI via a crafted HTML page.
Insufficient policy enforcement in navigations in Google Chrome prior to 81.0.4044.92 allowed a remote attacker to bypass navigation restrictions via a crafted HTML page.
Insufficient policy enforcement in extensions in Google Chrome prior to 81.0.4044.92 allowed a remote attacker to bypass navigation restrictions via a crafted HTML page.
Use after free in devtools in Google Chrome prior to 81.0.4044.92 allowed a remote attacker to potentially exploit heap corruption via a crafted HTML page.
Insufficient policy enforcement in extensions in Google Chrome prior to 81.0.4044.92 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to bypass navigation restrictions via a crafted HTML page.
GnuTLS 3.6.x before 3.6.13 uses incorrect cryptography for DTLS. The earliest affected version is 3.6.3 (2018-07-16) because of an error in a 2017-10-06 commit. The DTLS client always uses 32 '\0' bytes instead of a random value, and thus contributes no randomness to a DTLS negotiation. This breaks the security guarantees of the DTLS protocol.
In the Linux kernel 5.5.0 and newer, the bpf verifier (kernel/bpf/verifier.c) did not properly restrict the register bounds for 32-bit operations, leading to out-of-bounds reads and writes in kernel memory. The vulnerability also affects the Linux 5.4 stable series, starting with v5.4.7, as the introducing commit was backported to that branch. This vulnerability was fixed in 5.6.1, 5.5.14, and 5.4.29. (issue is aka ZDI-CAN-10780)
In Apache HTTP Server 2.4.0 to 2.4.41, redirects configured with mod_rewrite that were intended to be self-referential might be fooled by encoded newlines and redirect instead to an an unexpected URL within the request URL.
An exploitable signed comparison vulnerability exists in the ARMv7 memcpy() implementation of GNU glibc 2.30.9000. Calling memcpy() (on ARMv7 targets that utilize the GNU glibc implementation) with a negative value for the 'num' parameter results in a signed comparison vulnerability. If an attacker underflows the 'num' parameter to memcpy(), this vulnerability could lead to undefined behavior such as writing to out-of-bounds memory and potentially remote code execution. Furthermore, this memcpy() implementation allows for program execution to continue in scenarios where a segmentation fault or crash should have occurred. The dangers occur in that subsequent execution and iterations of this code will be executed with this corrupted data.