Công ty Cơ điện DMEC là nhà thầu cơ điện chuyên bảo trì cơ điện, thi công cơ điện, thiết kế cơ điện, giám sát cơ điện, bảo trì PCCC, thi công PCCC, thiết kế PCCC, giám sát PCCC, tư vấn kỹ thuật, tư vấn giám sát, quản lý dự án, quản lý cao ốc, tổ chức sự kiện, sản xuất thiết bị cơ điện, cung cấp vật tư thiết bị cơ điện
Industry
—
Origin
—
Global rank
—
Rank in
—
Updated at
F59/100
Security level
Low
Data confidence
High
Scope checked
94.1%
The higher the score, the more externally observable protections the system has recorded. This page does not certify that the website is reputable, legitimate, or completely free of vulnerabilities.
Is the website “dmec.vn” safe?
As of July 21, 2026 at 20:20, dmec.vn has a security score of 59/100 (grade F – “Low”). CyStack’s automated assessment recorded 20 issues to review after completing 94.1% of applicable checks. The website owner should address “Certificate matches the website” first, then review the remaining items in order of impact.
Does dmec.vn show known scam, phishing, or malware signals?
At assessment time, CyStack did not find dmec.vn or related infrastructure on any scam, phishing, or malware warning list after checking 5 online reputation sources. This result reflects external observations; it does not guarantee absolute safety or verify the organization’s legal status or reputation.
Compare the security level of each assessed category at a glance.
Network attack surface80/100 · Fair90.9% of this category was checked
Web security40.5/100 · High risk100% of this category was checked
Frequently asked questions
What affects the security of dmec.vn?
A valid SSL certificate still does not prove that dmec.vn is safe, legitimate, or free of scam signals. For a more complete assessment, this report also checks phishing and malware, exposed email records, IPs and open ports, subdomains, technologies, and CVEs that may apply to observed versions.
Does dmec.vn use HTTPS, and is its SSL certificate valid?
HTTPS on dmec.vn presented a certificate that was invalid or failed verification. The operator should review its validity dates, domain names, and trust chain.
Have @dmec.vn email addresses appeared in exposed data or information-stealer (infostealer) logs?
Data sources
Data compiled from CyStack cybersecurity monitoring systems
CyStack compiles scan results from its internal cybersecurity monitoring systems, including CyStack VulnScan and CyStack Threat Intelligence, together with publicly available Internet data. The assessment only observes and analyzes information already available; it does not attempt unauthorized access, test passwords, send exploit code, or change or disrupt the assessed system.
There are 3 issues to prioritize because they have the greatest impact on the security of dmec.vn.
Certificate matches the websiteThe certificate does not match the requested target.Critical
Check result
The certificate does not match the requested target.
Why it matters
The certificate must list the exact hostname visitors requested in its Subject Alternative Names (SAN). A mismatch produces browser warnings because the certificate may belong to a different service.
What to do
Issue and deploy a certificate whose SAN list includes every public hostname served by this website address.
Data recorded by the system
Assessed domain:
dmec.vn
Browser-trusted certificateThe certificate chain could not be validated to a trusted root.Critical
Check result
The certificate chain could not be validated to a trusted root.
Why it matters
Browsers trust a website only when its certificate can be traced to a recognized certificate provider. An untrusted certificate causes warnings and prevents visitors from reliably confirming the website's identity.
What to do
Known-exploited CVE candidatesFound 2 known-exploited candidate(s), but the external product fingerprint requires verification.Critical
Check result
Found 2 known-exploited candidate(s), but the external product fingerprint requires verification.
Why it matters
A possible CVE match also appears in the CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog, which means attackers have used that vulnerability in real incidents. The match is urgent to investigate, but the installed software still needs to be confirmed as affected.
Transport encryption52.9/100 · Review91.9% of this category was checked
Threat reputation100/100 · Good100% of this category was checked
Vulnerability and technology risk64.3/100 · Review100% of this category was checked
Email authentication0/100 · High risk100% of this category was checked
Data exposure100/100 · Good100% of this category was checked
Domain and DNS hygiene70/100 · Fair55.6% of this category was checked
Issues to review
The complete list of issues to review, including the three priorities highlighted in the summary.
Certificate matches the websiteHTTPS and encryptionFailed
Check result
The certificate does not match the requested target.
Why it matters
The certificate must list the exact hostname visitors requested in its Subject Alternative Names (SAN). A mismatch produces browser warnings because the certificate may belong to a different service.
What to do
Issue and deploy a certificate whose SAN list includes every public hostname served by this website address.
Data recorded by the system
Assessed domain:
dmec.vn
Browser-trusted certificateHTTPS and encryptionFailed
Check result
The certificate chain could not be validated to a trusted root.
Why it matters
Browsers trust a website only when its certificate can be traced to a recognized certificate provider. An untrusted certificate causes warnings and prevents visitors from reliably confirming the website's identity.
Found 2 known-exploited candidate(s), but the external product fingerprint requires verification.
Why it matters
A possible CVE match also appears in the CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog, which means attackers have used that vulnerability in real incidents. The match is urgent to investigate, but the installed software still needs to be confirmed as affected.
A confirmed public legacy cleartext service was found: 203.162.31.118:21 (ftp), 203.162.31.118:110 (pop3), 203.162.31.118:143 (imap).
Why it matters
Older services such as Telnet, FTP, and unencrypted mail or directory protocols can send passwords and data in readable form. Anyone able to observe the network path may capture them.
What to do
Session cookies protected from scripts (HttpOnly)Website protectionFailed
Check result
This check found a security issue.
Why it matters
HttpOnly prevents browser scripts from directly reading a cookie. It does not fix script injection, but it makes theft of session and authentication cookies more difficult.
What to do
Set HttpOnly on session and authentication cookies unless the application has a documented need to read them in browser code.
Cookies sent only over HTTPS (Secure)Website protectionFailed
Check result
This check found a security issue.
Why it matters
The Secure attribute prevents a browser from sending a cookie over unencrypted HTTP. Without it, session or authentication data may be exposed to someone observing the network.
What to do
Set Secure on every session, authentication, and other sensitive cookie served by the HTTPS application.
Content Security Policy (CSP) limits where scripts, styles, frames, and other browser content may come from. A strong policy reduces the impact if an attacker manages to inject content into a page.
What to do
Define only the sources the application needs, test the policy before activating it, and avoid broad wildcard (*) rules, unsafe-inline, and unsafe-eval where possible.
DMARC lets the domain owner tell receiving services what to do when the visible From address is not verified by SPF or DKIM. Without DMARC, attackers have more opportunity to impersonate the domain in phishing email.
What to do
Potential CVEs for observed versionsSoftware vulnerabilitiesNeeds review
Check result
Found 81 potentially applicable CVE candidate(s), including 58 high or critical candidate(s).
Why it matters
The detected product and version were compared with vulnerability records from the National Vulnerability Database (NVD). A match is a lead, not confirmation: the installed software may include vendor fixes or may differ from the version visible on the Internet.
Domain registration expiryDomain and DNSUnknown
Check result
The scan did not collect enough evidence for a reliable conclusion.
Why it matters
An expired domain stops directing users to the organization's services and may eventually become available to someone else. A domain close to expiry leaves little time to recover from payment or account problems.
What to do
Renew well before the expiry date, enable automatic renewal, and protect the payment method and registrar account.
Domain registration statusDomain and DNSUnknown
Check result
The scan did not collect enough evidence for a reliable conclusion.
Why it matters
Registrar or registry restrictions such as hold, redemption, or pending deletion can disable the domain. If they are not resolved, the organization may lose control of its website and email identity.
What to do
Resolve registration restrictions promptly, protect the registrar account with MFA, and keep ownership and contact information current.
Protection from deceptive framing (clickjacking)Website protectionFailed
Check result
This check found a security issue.
Why it matters
Another website can place this page inside a hidden or misleading frame and trick a user into clicking an unintended action. Frame restrictions tell browsers which sites, if any, may embed the page.
Without the nosniff setting, a browser may guess a file's type and treat harmless-looking content as executable code. This can turn an incorrect Content-Type into a security issue.
What to do
Send X-Content-Type-Options: nosniff on every response and return an accurate Content-Type.
HSTS availabilityHTTPS and encryptionFailed
Check result
The HTTPS response does not contain an effective HSTS policy.
Why it matters
HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) tells a browser to use HTTPS automatically on future visits. This reduces the chance that a visitor is downgraded to an unencrypted connection.
What to do
After confirming that every required page works over HTTPS, send the Strict-Transport-Security header on all HTTPS responses.
Automatic redirect to HTTPSHTTPS and encryptionFailed
Check result
The HTTP root remains reachable without completing an HTTPS redirect.
Why it matters
Visitors may enter an address beginning with HTTP or follow an old link. Redirecting them immediately to HTTPS prevents the rest of the visit from continuing over an unencrypted connection.
Sender Policy Framework (SPF) lists the systems allowed to send email for the domain. Without it, receiving services have less evidence to distinguish legitimate mail from spoofed mail.
What to do
Publish one SPF TXT record that includes every legitimate email service and no unauthorized sender.
Email routing records (MX)Domain and DNSFailed
Check result
Found 1 MX record(s); 1 target(s) were invalid.
Why it matters
MX records direct incoming email to the correct mail servers. Broken records can stop delivery, while a Null MX clearly tells senders that the domain does not receive email.
What to do
Correct unreachable or outdated MX hosts, or publish a Null MX if the domain is not intended to receive email.
CyStack confirmed at least 4 active DNS subdomains. Some discovery checks were incomplete, so this is a minimum rather than a final total.
Why it matters
Names containing admin, development, staging, VPN, database, or monitoring terms may point attackers toward valuable systems. A name alone does not prove exposure, but it identifies a surface that should be reviewed.
What to do
Remove obsolete DNS names and protect non-public systems with strong authentication, MFA, network allowlists, or a VPN.
Data recorded by the system
Data available:
Yes
Complete:
No
List shortened:
Complete certificate chainHTTPS and encryptionUnknown
Check result
The server presented 1 certificate(s).
Why it matters
The server must provide the intermediate certificates that connect its website certificate to a trusted provider. If any are missing, some browsers, mobile devices, or API clients may reject the connection.
What to do
Configure the server to send the website certificate followed by every required intermediate certificate, but not the root certificate.
Permissions-Policy controls whether this page and embedded content may use features such as the camera, microphone, and location. Leaving unused features available creates unnecessary access paths.
When a visitor follows a link, the browser may send the previous page's URL to the destination. Paths and query values in that URL can reveal sensitive context to another website.
What to do
Use strict-origin-when-cross-origin or a stricter Referrer-Policy, and avoid placing secrets in URLs.
A domain should clearly state whether it receives email. Without valid MX records or a Null MX, senders may try an unintended server and delivery behavior becomes unpredictable.
What to do
Publish valid MX records for the intended mail servers, or a Null MX if the domain never accepts email.
Allowed certificate issuers (CAA)Domain and DNSNeeds review
Check result
Found 0 applicable CAA record(s).
Why it matters
Certificate Authority Authorization (CAA) records state which certificate providers may issue certificates for the domain. This reduces the chance of an unintended provider issuing one.
What to do
Publish CAA records that allow only the certificate providers your organization actually uses.
DNS response protection (DNSSEC)Domain and DNSNeeds review
Check result
No DNSSEC DS delegation was found.
Why it matters
DNSSEC adds digital signatures so resolvers can detect forged DNS answers. This quick check confirms the parent domain has a DS record, but it does not validate the complete signature chain.
What to do
Sign the DNS zone, publish the matching DS record through the registrar, and monitor the signature chain after key changes.
Other evaluated controls (28)
Password form transport securityWebsite protection
Check result
No issue was found by this check.
Why it matters
If either a password page or the address receiving its form uses HTTP, someone observing the network may read or change the submitted password.
What to do
Serve every page containing a password field over HTTPS and submit each password form directly to an HTTPS address.
Data recorded by the system
Password forms:
1
Secure website connection (HTTPS)HTTPS and encryption
Check result
A TLS handshake succeeded on port 443.
Why it matters
HTTPS encrypts data between visitors and the website and helps prove they reached the intended service. Without it, network observers may read or alter traffic and browsers may show a security warning.
What to do
Provide the entire website over HTTPS using a certificate trusted by common browsers.
Data recorded by the system
Encryption suite:
TLS ECDHE RSA WITH AES 128 GCM SHA256
IP address:
203.162.31.118
Version:
TLS 1.2
Public DNS recordsDomain and DNS
Check result
The target resolved to 1 public IP address(es).
Why it matters
Public DNS connects the domain to its Internet addresses. Missing or incorrect records can make the service unreachable or send traffic to the wrong system.
What to do
Make sure the domain resolves only to its intended public IP addresses, and remove private, reserved, or outdated records.
Data recorded by the system
IP addresses:
203.162.31.118
Public management service exposurePublic infrastructure
Check result
No public management service was found on the scanned TCP port set.
Why it matters
Remote administration services such as RDP, VNC, Docker, Kubernetes, and management consoles are high-value targets. Public exposure allows anyone on the Internet to attempt passwords or exploit an unpatched service.
What to do
Remove direct Internet access and require a VPN, a hardened access gateway, or trusted source networks; also use MFA where supported.
Data recorded by the system
Complete:
Yes
Fingerprint Complete:
Yes
Fingerprint Identified:
8
Fingerprint Targets:
8
Database or cache exposed to the InternetPublic infrastructure
Check result
No public datastore service was found on the scanned TCP port set.
Why it matters
Databases and caches often contain sensitive information and are normally used only by internal applications. Direct Internet access makes password attacks and configuration mistakes much more likely to become a data breach.
What to do
Listen only on private interfaces, allow connections only from required application systems, and require strong authentication and encryption.
Data recorded by the system
Complete:
Yes
Fingerprint Complete:
Yes
Fingerprint Identified:
8
Fingerprint Targets:
8
File-sharing service exposed to the InternetPublic infrastructure
Check result
No public file-sharing service was found on the scanned TCP port set.
Why it matters
Services such as SMB, NFS, and rsync can reveal or modify shared files and have a history of serious vulnerabilities. They rarely need to accept connections directly from the public Internet.
What to do
Limit file-sharing services to private networks or a tightly controlled VPN, and allow only the users and systems that require access.
Data recorded by the system
Complete:
Yes
Fingerprint Complete:
Yes
Fingerprint Identified:
8
Fingerprint Targets:
8
Cross-site access rules (CORS)Website protection
Check result
No issue was found by this check.
Why it matters
Cross-Origin Resource Sharing (CORS) decides which websites may read responses from this service in a visitor's browser. Rules that trust arbitrary origins, especially with login cookies, can expose private data to another website.
What to do
Allow only explicitly trusted websites, compare the Origin value with an exact approved list, and never allow login credentials with the wildcard origin (*).
Data recorded by the system
Arbitrary origin accepted:
No
Credentials allowed:
No
Allows all origins:
No
Certificate expiry and validityHTTPS and encryption
Check result
The certificate is valid from 2023-11-02T08:41:02Z to 2033-10-30T08:41:02Z.
Why it matters
A certificate works only between its start and expiry dates. An expired, not-yet-valid, or soon-to-expire certificate can trigger browser warnings and interrupt access to the website or API.
What to do
Use automatic renewal, monitor renewal failures, and alert the responsible team well before expiry.
Data recorded by the system
Days remaining:
2,657.8
Expires at:
Valid from:
Certificate key and signature strengthHTTPS and encryption
Check result
The certificate uses SHA256-RSA with a 2048-bit public key.
Why it matters
The certificate's public key and signature algorithm protect it from forgery. Keys that are too short or signatures based on obsolete algorithms provide less protection against modern attacks.
What to do
Use RSA with at least 2048 bits or a modern elliptic-curve key, and use SHA-256 or a stronger signature algorithm.
Data recorded by the system
Public-key algorithm:
RSA
Public-key size:
2,048
Signature algorithm:
SHA256-RSA
Supported TLS versionsHTTPS and encryption
Check result
Accepted versions: TLS 1.2.
Why it matters
TLS 1.0 and TLS 1.1 use outdated security designs and are no longer accepted by modern standards. Leaving them enabled allows older, weaker connection methods.
What to do
Disable TLS 1.0 and TLS 1.1, support TLS 1.2 securely, and enable TLS 1.3 where possible.
No independent abuse-list consensus was found across 5 definitive providers.
Why it matters
Security and email providers maintain DNS-based blacklists of IP addresses associated with spam, malware, or compromised systems. Several current, independent listings are a strong reason to investigate, although a shared IP can sometimes affect unrelated customers.
What to do
Verify each listing against the affected IP, investigate mail and host activity, fix the underlying cause, and then follow the provider's removal process.
A policy of quarantine or reject tells receiving services to move suspicious mail to spam or refuse it. A monitoring-only policy (p=none) records the problem but does not ask receivers to stop spoofed mail.
What to do
After every legitimate sender passes DMARC, move gradually to quarantine and then reject, covering 100% of messages.
Receiving services may ignore a DMARC record that contains duplicate fields, invalid values, or is published at the wrong DNS name. An ignored record provides no reliable protection from domain impersonation.
What to do
Publish one valid DMARC record at _dmarc and correct duplicate fields, unsupported values, and invalid report addresses.
SameSite limits when a browser includes cookies in requests started by another website. This helps prevent another site from silently making an authenticated request on a user's behalf.
What to do
Use SameSite=Lax or Strict by default. Use SameSite=None only for a required cross-site flow and always combine it with Secure.
Data recorded by the system
Cookies missing SameSite:
0
SameSite=None cookies missing Secure:
0
Total:
3
Insecure content on an HTTPS pageWebsite protection
Check result
No issue was found by this check.
Why it matters
An HTTPS page can still load scripts, frames, styles, or forms over unencrypted HTTP. An attacker on the network may alter that content and compromise the otherwise secure page.
What to do
Load every script, frame, stylesheet, and form destination over HTTPS, and remove or replace resources that do not support it.
Data recorded by the system
Insecure page resources:
0
Public directory listingSoftware vulnerabilities
Check result
The root page did not match a common automatic directory-index pattern.
Why it matters
When a web server automatically lists a directory, visitors may discover files that were never linked publicly, including backups, logs, or deployment artifacts.
What to do
Disable automatic directory indexes unless public file browsing is an intentional feature, and remove sensitive files from web-accessible folders.
Data recorded by the system
Directory listing pattern found:
No
Homepage only:
Yes
Infostealer credential exposureExposed data
Check result
No matching credential exposure records were found in the currently indexed intelligence data. This does not prove that no exposure exists.
Why it matters
Infostealer intelligence may contain credentials associated with the domain, but it does not prove that an account is current, valid, or still exposed.
What to do
Review the masked evidence and observation time, validate affected accounts and devices, then reset active credentials and sessions, enforce MFA, and remove malware where confirmed.
The final SPF rule tells receiving services how confidently they should reject unlisted senders. A permissive result allows more spoofed mail to appear legitimate than a hard fail (-all).
What to do
Confirm that every legitimate sender is included, then end the SPF record with -all.
More than one SPF record, invalid terms, or too many DNS lookups can make SPF return a permanent error. Receiving services may then be unable to verify authorized senders.
What to do
Keep one valid SPF record, remove invalid terms, and remain within the SPF limit of ten DNS-based lookups.
No public unexpected service was found on the scanned TCP port set.
Why it matters
Every open service can be discovered and attacked and must be configured, monitored, and patched. Services without a clear public purpose add risk without providing business value.
What to do
Confirm the owner and purpose of every open port, then stop or firewall any service that is not intentionally public.
Data recorded by the system
Complete:
Yes
Fingerprint Complete:
Yes
Fingerprint Identified:
8
Fingerprint Targets:
8
Exposed software versionSoftware vulnerabilities
Check result
No issue was found by this check.
Why it matters
Exact web server or framework versions help attackers quickly look for known weaknesses that may apply. Hiding a version is not a substitute for patching, but unnecessary disclosure gives away useful targeting information.
What to do
Remove unnecessary version details from Server, X-Powered-By, error pages, and application metadata, and keep the software patched.
DNS service redundancyDomain and DNS
Check result
Found 2 authoritative name server(s).
Why it matters
Authoritative name servers tell visitors where the domain is hosted. Depending on only one server creates a single point of failure for the website and email.
What to do
Use at least two authoritative name servers, preferably on independent and resilient infrastructure.
Data recorded by the system
DNS servers:
ns3.vdc3.vn, ns4.vdc3.vn
HSTS protection periodHTTPS and encryptionNot applicable
Check result
This check does not apply to the target.
Why it matters
The max-age value controls how long browsers remember to use HTTPS. A very short period provides limited protection, while includeSubDomains also covers every subdomain and can break one that does not support HTTPS.
What to do
Use a long max-age, and add includeSubDomains only after confirming that every active subdomain works correctly over HTTPS.
DMARC aggregate reports show which systems send email using the domain and which messages fail verification. They help find both impersonation attempts and legitimate services that need correction.
What to do
Add an aggregate report address (rua) that is protected and monitored, or use a trusted DMARC reporting service.
5 providers were definitive and 1 were inconclusive.
Why it matters
This shows how many independent blacklist services returned a clear result. A service that was unavailable was not checked successfully and must not be treated as a clean result.
Data recorded by the system
Blocklists with no match:
5
Confirmed blocklist matches:
No
Blocklists checked conclusively:
5
Blocklists unavailable:
1
Technologies visible from the InternetSoftware vulnerabilitiesInformation
Check result
Public signals from the website and its open services revealed 14 technology item(s).
Why it matters
Response headers, page content, and other public clues suggest which technologies the service uses. These observations help explain the attack surface, but they can be incomplete or mistaken and do not by themselves confirm a vulnerability.
Data recorded by the system
Technologies found:
14
Detection method:
Website and exposed-service analysis
Root Response Count:
9
Service Inventory Complete:
Observed WAF, CDN, or edge serviceSoftware vulnerabilitiesInformation
Check result
No WAF, CDN, or edge product matched the passive root-response signals; this does not prove that protection is absent.
Why it matters
Public response details suggest that a Web Application Firewall (WAF), CDN, or other edge service is present. This quick scan identified the provider but did not test whether attack blocking is configured or working correctly.
Observed 6 versioned product(s); 4 had exact CPE mappings and 4 completed lookup(s).
Why it matters
This shows how many detected products had reliable version information and an exact CPE identity, allowing them to be checked against CVE applicability data. A product that could not be checked must not be treated as free of known vulnerabilities.
Check whether the website uses a secure connection and whether its HTTPS certificate remains valid.
Reachable
Yes
HTTP redirects to HTTPS
No
Certificate status
Certificate is invalid
HTTPS version
TLS 1.2
Cipher suite
TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256
Browser protection settings
0
Cookies
3
Web firewall and IP reputation
Identify website protection and check whether public IPs appear on warning lists.
WAF and edge protection
Not identifiedNot identifying a WAF does not prove that the website has no WAF.
IP warning lists
No confirmed listing
Confirmed listed IPs
—
Sources with no flag
5
DNS, email and registration
Check domain and email settings that help prevent brand impersonation.
DNSSEC protection
No
Name servers
ns3.vdc3.vn, ns4.vdc3.vn
SPF policy
Not configured
DMARC policy
Potentially exposed domain email addressesChecks infostealer data only for email addresses whose domain exactly matches this target. A record is not counted merely because someone visited or signed in to this website.0 Matching email exposure records
0Matching email exposure records
0Related infected devices (estimated)
No exposure record was found for an email address whose domain exactly matches this target. This does not guarantee that an exposure has never occurred.
Discovered subdomains (4+)Subdomains discovered by CyStack, with sensitive-looking names shown first. Availability is verified during this assessment; individual subdomains have not been separately security-tested.Partial
forum.dmec.vnCustomer support
maymoc.dmec.vn
webmail.dmec.vnEmail system
www.dmec.vn
Public web contextThe website title, description, industry and popularity.
Page title
CÔNG TY TNHH CƠ ĐIỆN D.M.E.C |
Website category
—
Description
Công ty Cơ điện DMEC là nhà thầu cơ điện chuyên bảo trì cơ điện, thi công cơ điện, thiết kế cơ điện, giám sát cơ điện, bảo trì PCCC, thi công PCCC, thiết kế PCCC, giám sát PCCC, tư vấn kỹ thuật, tư vấn giám sát, quản lý dự án, quản lý cao ốc, tổ chức sự kiện, sản xuất thiết bị cơ điện, cung cấp vật tư thiết bị cơ điện
Global rank
—
Rank in
—
Rank in industry
—
This is a quick, point-in-time check from outside the organization. It can surface visible risks, but it does not replace penetration testing or an authenticated assessment.
No record associated with an @dmec.vn email address was found in the currently available data. This does not rule out incidents that have not been observed.
Which public IPs, services, and ports does dmec.vn expose?
The assessment observed 1 public IPs and 8 open ports for dmec.vn; the infrastructure appears to be operated by VietNam Data Communication Company. An open port is not automatically a vulnerability, but every public service should be updated and appropriately restricted.
How many subdomains of dmec.vn have been discovered?
The assessment observed 4+ public subdomains of dmec.vn. This list can reveal additional entry points such as APIs, administration systems, or test environments, but it does not mean that every subdomain is risky.
Confirm the exact installed package and read the vendor advisory. If that installation is affected, apply the vendor patch or upgrade to a fixed version.
An arbitrary file copy vulnerability in mod_copy in ProFTPD up to 1.3.5b allows for remote code execution and information disclosure without authentication, a related issue to CVE-2015-3306.
ProFTPD before 1.3.9c and 1.3.10rc3 contains a heap-based buffer overflow vulnerability in the mod_sftp module that allows authenticated low-privilege attackers to achieve arbitrary code execution by sending crafted SFTP packet fragments exceeding the 16 KB reassembly buffer in the fxp.c component. Attackers can supply oversized fragments to trigger an incorrectly conditioned reallocation, corrupt pool freelist metadata, overwrite the root_fs BSS global pointer to reference a fake filesystem struct, and redirect pr_fsio_stat() to system() via a crafted RENAME request.
ProFTPD through 1.3.9b and 1.3.10rc2 contains an access control bypass vulnerability that allows authenticated FTP users to circumvent Directory ACL restrictions by prefixing paths with /proc/self/root in the RNFR command handler. Attackers can exploit the unresolved symlink components in dir_canonical_path() to cause dir_check() to perform lexical path comparisons that match no configured Directory block, enabling rename operations on files in DenyAll-protected directories and subsequent retrieval of those files. Mitigation: Sessions configured with DefaultRoot (chroot) are not affected, as chroot changes the directory to which /proc/self/root resolves.
mod_sql in ProFTPD before 1.3.9a allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a username, in scenarios where there is logging of USER requests with an expansion such as %U, and the SQL backend allows commands (e.g., COPY TO PROGRAM).
ProFTPD before 1.3.6b and 1.3.7rc before 1.3.7rc2 allows remote unauthenticated denial-of-service due to incorrect handling of overly long commands because main.c in a child process enters an infinite loop.
An issue was discovered in tls_verify_crl in ProFTPD through 1.3.6b. Failure to check for the appropriate field of a CRL entry (checking twice for subject, rather than once for subject and once for issuer) prevents some valid CRLs from being taken into account, and can allow clients whose certificates have been revoked to proceed with a connection to the server.
An issue was discovered in tls_verify_crl in ProFTPD before 1.3.6. A wrong iteration variable, used when checking a client certificate against CRL entries (installed by a system administrator), can cause some CRL entries to be ignored, and can allow clients whose certificates have been revoked to proceed with a connection to the server.
An issue was discovered in tls_verify_crl in ProFTPD before 1.3.6. Direct dereference of a NULL pointer (a variable initialized to NULL) leads to a crash when validating the certificate of a client connecting to the server in a TLS client/server mutual-authentication setup.
make_ftp_cmd in main.c in ProFTPD before 1.3.8a has a one-byte out-of-bounds read, and daemon crash, because of mishandling of quote/backslash semantics.
ProFTPD before 1.3.9c and 1.3.10rc3 contains a signed integer overflow vulnerability in the mod_sftp module's SCP size-record parser that allows authenticated low-privilege attackers to bypass ASLR by sending a crafted file size value of UINT64_MAX, which results in a negative off_t value. Attackers can exploit the subsequent conversion to uint32_t, causing an approximately 4 GB requested read length and forcing the server to read beyond the end of the SSH channel data and write overread process memory into the uploaded file. In tested configurations, the disclosed data contains libc, libcrypto, and PIE pointers sufficient to derive their randomized base addresses, thereby bypassing ASLR and enabling reliable exploitation of memory corruption vulnerabilities in the same process.
ProFTPD mod_sftp contains a heap-based buffer overflow reachable by an authenticated SFTP user. The fxp_packet_read() function accepts the attacker-supplied 32-bit big-endian SFTP packet length without a minimum sanity check. A value of 0 causes an unsigned subtraction elsewhere in the read path to underflow to approximately 4 GB. That oversized request reaches the core memory allocator, where the rounded size is computed in size_t but passed to new_block() as a 32-bit int; the low 32 bits of 0x100000000 are 0, so new_block() returns a small (~512-byte) block while the caller is told it received ~4 GB. The subsequent fill loop then streams attacker-controlled bytes past the end of the 544-byte allocation, producing an attacker-controlled heap buffer overflow. An authenticated user can crash the per-connection ProFTPD session child on demand with a single malformed SFTP packet (packet_len=0 followed by a body greater than approximately 544 bytes), producing reliable authenticated remote denial of service. Depending on heap layout and adjacent allocations, heap metadata corruption and further consequences beyond denial of service may be possible, though only denial of service is demonstrated by the supplied proof of concept.
The SSH transport protocol with certain OpenSSH extensions, found in OpenSSH before 9.6 and other products, allows remote attackers to bypass integrity checks such that some packets are omitted (from the extension negotiation message), and a client and server may consequently end up with a connection for which some security features have been downgraded or disabled, aka a Terrapin attack. This occurs because the SSH Binary Packet Protocol (BPP), implemented by these extensions, mishandles the handshake phase and mishandles use of sequence numbers. For example, there is an effective attack against SSH's use of ChaCha20-Poly1305 (and CBC with Encrypt-then-MAC). The bypass occurs in chacha20-poly1305@openssh.com and (if CBC is used) the -etm@openssh.com MAC algorithms. This also affects Maverick Synergy Java SSH API before 3.1.0-SNAPSHOT, Dropbear through 2022.83, Ssh before 5.1.1 in Erlang/OTP, PuTTY before 0.80, AsyncSSH before 2.14.2, golang.org/x/crypto before 0.17.0, libssh before 0.10.6, libssh2 through 1.11.0, Thorn Tech SFTP Gateway before 3.4.6, Tera Term before 5.1, Paramiko before 3.4.0, jsch before 0.2.15, SFTPGo before 2.5.6, Netgate pfSense Plus through 23.09.1, Netgate pfSense CE through 2.7.2, HPN-SSH through 18.2.0, ProFTPD before 1.3.8b (and before 1.3.9rc2), ORYX CycloneSSH before 2.3.4, NetSarang XShell 7 before Build 0144, CrushFTP before 10.6.0, ConnectBot SSH library before 2.2.22, Apache MINA sshd through 2.11.0, sshj through 0.37.0, TinySSH through 20230101, trilead-ssh2 6401, LANCOM LCOS and LANconfig, FileZilla before 3.66.4, Nova before 11.8, PKIX-SSH before 14.4, SecureCRT before 9.4.3, Transmit5 before 5.10.4, Win32-OpenSSH before 9.5.0.0p1-Beta, WinSCP before 6.2.2, Bitvise SSH Server before 9.32, Bitvise SSH Client before 9.33, KiTTY through 0.76.1.13, the net-ssh gem 7.2.0 for Ruby, the mscdex ssh2 module before 1.15.0 for Node.js, the thrussh library before 0.35.1 for Rust, and the Russh crate before 0.40.2 for Rust.
CVE-2019-19269Proftpd 1.3.5CVSS 4.9
Matched product: Proftpd 1.3.5 Confidence: Medium
An issue was discovered in tls_verify_crl in ProFTPD through 1.3.6b. A dereference of a NULL pointer may occur. This pointer is returned by the OpenSSL sk_X509_REVOKED_value() function when encountering an empty CRL installed by a system administrator. The dereference occurs when validating the certificate of a client connecting to the server in a TLS client/server mutual-authentication setup.
An issue was discovered in the base64d function in the SMTP listener in Exim before 4.90.1. By sending a handcrafted message, a buffer overflow may happen. This can be used to execute code remotely.
jQuery is a JavaScript library which is a free, open-source software designed to simplify HTML DOM tree traversal and manipulation, as well as event handling, CSS animation, and Ajax.
jQuery is a JavaScript library which is a free, open-source software designed to simplify HTML DOM tree traversal and manipulation, as well as event handling, CSS animation, and Ajax.
In jQuery versions greater than or equal to 1.0.3 and before 3.5.0, passing HTML containing <option> elements from untrusted sources - even after sanitizing it - to one of jQuery's DOM manipulation methods (i.e. .html(), .append(), and others) may execute untrusted code. This problem is patched in jQuery 3.5.0.
GGoogle Tag ManagerVersion not visibleTag ManagersVersion not visible
ConfidenceMedium
Google Tag Manager is a tag management system (TMS) that allows you to quickly and easily update measurement codes and related code fragments collectively known as tags on your website or mobile app.
An issue was discovered in the base64d function in the SMTP listener in Exim before 4.90.1. By sending a handcrafted message, a buffer overflow may happen. This can be used to execute code remotely.
An issue was discovered in the base64d function in the SMTP listener in Exim before 4.90.1. By sending a handcrafted message, a buffer overflow may happen. This can be used to execute code remotely.
Other website-level technologiesThese products were observed from the public website, but the available evidence was not sufficient to assign them safely to one IP and port.
An arbitrary file copy vulnerability in mod_copy in ProFTPD up to 1.3.5b allows for remote code execution and information disclosure without authentication, a related issue to CVE-2015-3306.
ProFTPD before 1.3.9c and 1.3.10rc3 contains a heap-based buffer overflow vulnerability in the mod_sftp module that allows authenticated low-privilege attackers to achieve arbitrary code execution by sending crafted SFTP packet fragments exceeding the 16 KB reassembly buffer in the fxp.c component. Attackers can supply oversized fragments to trigger an incorrectly conditioned reallocation, corrupt pool freelist metadata, overwrite the root_fs BSS global pointer to reference a fake filesystem struct, and redirect pr_fsio_stat() to system() via a crafted RENAME request.
ProFTPD through 1.3.9b and 1.3.10rc2 contains an access control bypass vulnerability that allows authenticated FTP users to circumvent Directory ACL restrictions by prefixing paths with /proc/self/root in the RNFR command handler. Attackers can exploit the unresolved symlink components in dir_canonical_path() to cause dir_check() to perform lexical path comparisons that match no configured Directory block, enabling rename operations on files in DenyAll-protected directories and subsequent retrieval of those files. Mitigation: Sessions configured with DefaultRoot (chroot) are not affected, as chroot changes the directory to which /proc/self/root resolves.
mod_sql in ProFTPD before 1.3.9a allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a username, in scenarios where there is logging of USER requests with an expansion such as %U, and the SQL backend allows commands (e.g., COPY TO PROGRAM).
An issue was discovered in tls_verify_crl in ProFTPD before 1.3.6. A wrong iteration variable, used when checking a client certificate against CRL entries (installed by a system administrator), can cause some CRL entries to be ignored, and can allow clients whose certificates have been revoked to proceed with a connection to the server.
An issue was discovered in tls_verify_crl in ProFTPD before 1.3.6. Direct dereference of a NULL pointer (a variable initialized to NULL) leads to a crash when validating the certificate of a client connecting to the server in a TLS client/server mutual-authentication setup.
make_ftp_cmd in main.c in ProFTPD before 1.3.8a has a one-byte out-of-bounds read, and daemon crash, because of mishandling of quote/backslash semantics.
ProFTPD before 1.3.9c and 1.3.10rc3 contains a signed integer overflow vulnerability in the mod_sftp module's SCP size-record parser that allows authenticated low-privilege attackers to bypass ASLR by sending a crafted file size value of UINT64_MAX, which results in a negative off_t value. Attackers can exploit the subsequent conversion to uint32_t, causing an approximately 4 GB requested read length and forcing the server to read beyond the end of the SSH channel data and write overread process memory into the uploaded file. In tested configurations, the disclosed data contains libc, libcrypto, and PIE pointers sufficient to derive their randomized base addresses, thereby bypassing ASLR and enabling reliable exploitation of memory corruption vulnerabilities in the same process.
ProFTPD mod_sftp contains a heap-based buffer overflow reachable by an authenticated SFTP user. The fxp_packet_read() function accepts the attacker-supplied 32-bit big-endian SFTP packet length without a minimum sanity check. A value of 0 causes an unsigned subtraction elsewhere in the read path to underflow to approximately 4 GB. That oversized request reaches the core memory allocator, where the rounded size is computed in size_t but passed to new_block() as a 32-bit int; the low 32 bits of 0x100000000 are 0, so new_block() returns a small (~512-byte) block while the caller is told it received ~4 GB. The subsequent fill loop then streams attacker-controlled bytes past the end of the 544-byte allocation, producing an attacker-controlled heap buffer overflow. An authenticated user can crash the per-connection ProFTPD session child on demand with a single malformed SFTP packet (packet_len=0 followed by a body greater than approximately 544 bytes), producing reliable authenticated remote denial of service. Depending on heap layout and adjacent allocations, heap metadata corruption and further consequences beyond denial of service may be possible, though only denial of service is demonstrated by the supplied proof of concept.
The SSH transport protocol with certain OpenSSH extensions, found in OpenSSH before 9.6 and other products, allows remote attackers to bypass integrity checks such that some packets are omitted (from the extension negotiation message), and a client and server may consequently end up with a connection for which some security features have been downgraded or disabled, aka a Terrapin attack. This occurs because the SSH Binary Packet Protocol (BPP), implemented by these extensions, mishandles the handshake phase and mishandles use of sequence numbers. For example, there is an effective attack against SSH's use of ChaCha20-Poly1305 (and CBC with Encrypt-then-MAC). The bypass occurs in chacha20-poly1305@openssh.com and (if CBC is used) the -etm@openssh.com MAC algorithms. This also affects Maverick Synergy Java SSH API before 3.1.0-SNAPSHOT, Dropbear through 2022.83, Ssh before 5.1.1 in Erlang/OTP, PuTTY before 0.80, AsyncSSH before 2.14.2, golang.org/x/crypto before 0.17.0, libssh before 0.10.6, libssh2 through 1.11.0, Thorn Tech SFTP Gateway before 3.4.6, Tera Term before 5.1, Paramiko before 3.4.0, jsch before 0.2.15, SFTPGo before 2.5.6, Netgate pfSense Plus through 23.09.1, Netgate pfSense CE through 2.7.2, HPN-SSH through 18.2.0, ProFTPD before 1.3.8b (and before 1.3.9rc2), ORYX CycloneSSH before 2.3.4, NetSarang XShell 7 before Build 0144, CrushFTP before 10.6.0, ConnectBot SSH library before 2.2.22, Apache MINA sshd through 2.11.0, sshj through 0.37.0, TinySSH through 20230101, trilead-ssh2 6401, LANCOM LCOS and LANconfig, FileZilla before 3.66.4, Nova before 11.8, PKIX-SSH before 14.4, SecureCRT before 9.4.3, Transmit5 before 5.10.4, Win32-OpenSSH before 9.5.0.0p1-Beta, WinSCP before 6.2.2, Bitvise SSH Server before 9.32, Bitvise SSH Client before 9.33, KiTTY through 0.76.1.13, the net-ssh gem 7.2.0 for Ruby, the mscdex ssh2 module before 1.15.0 for Node.js, the thrussh library before 0.35.1 for Rust, and the Russh crate before 0.40.2 for Rust.
An issue was discovered in tls_verify_crl in ProFTPD through 1.3.6b. A dereference of a NULL pointer may occur. This pointer is returned by the OpenSSL sk_X509_REVOKED_value() function when encountering an empty CRL installed by a system administrator. The dereference occurs when validating the certificate of a client connecting to the server in a TLS client/server mutual-authentication setup.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 allows Integer Overflow to Buffer Overflow in receive_add_recipient via an e-mail message with fifty million recipients. NOTE: remote exploitation may be difficult because of resource consumption.
Exim 4 before 4.92 allows Integer Overflow to Buffer Overflow, in which an unauthenticated remote attacker can execute arbitrary code by leveraging the mishandling of continuation lines during header-length restriction.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 has Improper Restriction of Write Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer. This occurs when processing name=value pairs within MAIL FROM and RCPT TO commands.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 allows Buffer Underwrite that may result in unauthenticated remote attackers executing arbitrary commands, because smtp_ungetc was only intended to push back characters, but can actually push back non-character error codes such as EOF.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 has Improper Neutralization of Line Delimiters, relevant in non-default configurations that enable Delivery Status Notification (DSN). Certain uses of ORCPT= can place a newline into a spool header file, and indirectly allow unauthenticated remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands as root.
Exim AUTH Out-Of-Bounds Write Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of Exim. Authentication is not required to exploit this vulnerability.
The specific flaw exists within the smtp service, which listens on TCP port 25 by default. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of user-supplied data, which can result in a write past the end of a buffer. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the service account.
. Was ZDI-CAN-17434.
Exim SMTP Challenge Stack-based Buffer Overflow Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of Exim. Authentication is not required to exploit this vulnerability.
The specific flaw exists within the handling of NTLM challenge requests. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of the length of user-supplied data prior to copying it to a fixed-length stack-based buffer. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the service account.
. Was ZDI-CAN-17515.
Exim Improper Neutralization of Special Elements Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of Exim. Authentication is not required to exploit this vulnerability.
The specific flaw exists within the smtp service, which listens on TCP port 25 by default. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of user-supplied data, which can result in a memory corruption condition. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the current process. Was ZDI-CAN-17554.
Exim before 4.99.1, with certain non-default rate-limit configurations, allows a remote heap-based buffer overflow because database records are cast directly to internal structures without validation.
In Exim before 4.99.2, when JSON lookup is enabled, an out-of-bounds heap write can occur when a JSON operator encounters malformed JSON in an untrusted header, because of an incorrect implementation of \ skipping.
In Exim before 4.99.2, when the SPA authentication driver is used with an adversarial SPA resource, there can be an out-of-bounds write that crashes the connection instance, or erroneous data processing that divulges data from uninitialized heap memory.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 has Improper Neutralization of Line Delimiters. An authenticated remote SMTP client can insert newline characters into a spool file (which indirectly leads to remote code execution as root) via AUTH= in a MAIL FROM command.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 allows Execution with Unnecessary Privileges. Because Exim operates as root in the log directory (owned by a non-root user), a symlink or hard link attack allows overwriting critical root-owned files anywhere on the filesystem.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 allows Execution with Unnecessary Privileges. Because Exim operates as root in the spool directory (owned by a non-root user), an attacker can write to a /var/spool/exim4/input spool header file, in which a crafted recipient address can indirectly lead to command execution.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 allows Integer Overflow to Buffer Overflow because get_stdinput allows unbounded reads that are accompanied by unbounded increases in a certain size variable. NOTE: exploitation may be impractical because of the execution time needed to overflow (multiple days).
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 allows Out-of-bounds Write because the main function, while setuid root, copies the current working directory pathname into a buffer that is too small (on some common platforms).
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 allows Heap-based Buffer Overflow in queue_run via two sender options: -R and -S. This may cause privilege escalation from exim to root.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 allows Exposure of File Descriptor to Unintended Control Sphere because rda_interpret uses a privileged pipe that lacks a close-on-exec flag.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 allows Heap-based Buffer Overflow because it mishandles "-F '.('" on the command line, and thus may allow privilege escalation from any user to root. This occurs because of the interpretation of negative sizes in strncpy.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 has Improper Neutralization of Line Delimiters. Local users can alter the behavior of root processes because a recipient address can have a newline character.
A UNIX Symbolic Link (Symlink) Following vulnerability in the packaging of exim in openSUSE Factory allows local attackers to escalate from user mail to root. This issue affects: openSUSE Factory exim versions prior to 4.93.0.4-3.1.
The comparison found 47 potential matches for this product, but this report contains only a limited detail sample.
CVE-2020-11023jQuery 1.8.2KEVCVSS 6.1
Matched product: jQuery 1.8.2 Confidence: Medium
In jQuery versions greater than or equal to 1.0.3 and before 3.5.0, passing HTML containing <option> elements from untrusted sources - even after sanitizing it - to one of jQuery's DOM manipulation methods (i.e. .html(), .append(), and others) may execute untrusted code. This problem is patched in jQuery 3.5.0.
jQuery before 1.9.0 is vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting (XSS) attacks. The jQuery(strInput) function does not differentiate selectors from HTML in a reliable fashion. In vulnerable versions, jQuery determined whether the input was HTML by looking for the '<' character anywhere in the string, giving attackers more flexibility when attempting to construct a malicious payload. In fixed versions, jQuery only deems the input to be HTML if it explicitly starts with the '<' character, limiting exploitability only to attackers who can control the beginning of a string, which is far less common.
jQuery before 3.0.0 is vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting (XSS) attacks when a cross-domain Ajax request is performed without the dataType option, causing text/javascript responses to be executed.
jQuery before 3.4.0, as used in Drupal, Backdrop CMS, and other products, mishandles jQuery.extend(true, {}, ...) because of Object.prototype pollution. If an unsanitized source object contained an enumerable __proto__ property, it could extend the native Object.prototype.
In jQuery starting with 1.12.0 and before 3.5.0, passing HTML from untrusted sources - even after sanitizing it - to one of jQuery's DOM manipulation methods (i.e. .html(), .append(), and others) may execute untrusted code. This problem is patched in jQuery 3.5.0.
GGoogle Tag ManagerVersion not visibleTag ManagersVersion not visible
ConfidenceMedium
Google Tag Manager is a tag management system (TMS) that allows you to quickly and easily update measurement codes and related code fragments collectively known as tags on your website or mobile app.
jQuery before 1.9.0 is vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting (XSS) attacks. The jQuery(strInput) function does not differentiate selectors from HTML in a reliable fashion. In vulnerable versions, jQuery determined whether the input was HTML by looking for the '<' character anywhere in the string, giving attackers more flexibility when attempting to construct a malicious payload. In fixed versions, jQuery only deems the input to be HTML if it explicitly starts with the '<' character, limiting exploitability only to attackers who can control the beginning of a string, which is far less common.
jQuery before 3.0.0 is vulnerable to Cross-site Scripting (XSS) attacks when a cross-domain Ajax request is performed without the dataType option, causing text/javascript responses to be executed.
jQuery before 3.4.0, as used in Drupal, Backdrop CMS, and other products, mishandles jQuery.extend(true, {}, ...) because of Object.prototype pollution. If an unsanitized source object contained an enumerable __proto__ property, it could extend the native Object.prototype.
In jQuery starting with 1.12.0 and before 3.5.0, passing HTML from untrusted sources - even after sanitizing it - to one of jQuery's DOM manipulation methods (i.e. .html(), .append(), and others) may execute untrusted code. This problem is patched in jQuery 3.5.0.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 allows Integer Overflow to Buffer Overflow in receive_add_recipient via an e-mail message with fifty million recipients. NOTE: remote exploitation may be difficult because of resource consumption.
Exim 4 before 4.92 allows Integer Overflow to Buffer Overflow, in which an unauthenticated remote attacker can execute arbitrary code by leveraging the mishandling of continuation lines during header-length restriction.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 has Improper Restriction of Write Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer. This occurs when processing name=value pairs within MAIL FROM and RCPT TO commands.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 allows Buffer Underwrite that may result in unauthenticated remote attackers executing arbitrary commands, because smtp_ungetc was only intended to push back characters, but can actually push back non-character error codes such as EOF.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 has Improper Neutralization of Line Delimiters, relevant in non-default configurations that enable Delivery Status Notification (DSN). Certain uses of ORCPT= can place a newline into a spool header file, and indirectly allow unauthenticated remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands as root.
Exim AUTH Out-Of-Bounds Write Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of Exim. Authentication is not required to exploit this vulnerability.
The specific flaw exists within the smtp service, which listens on TCP port 25 by default. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of user-supplied data, which can result in a write past the end of a buffer. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the service account.
. Was ZDI-CAN-17434.
Exim SMTP Challenge Stack-based Buffer Overflow Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of Exim. Authentication is not required to exploit this vulnerability.
The specific flaw exists within the handling of NTLM challenge requests. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of the length of user-supplied data prior to copying it to a fixed-length stack-based buffer. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the service account.
. Was ZDI-CAN-17515.
Exim Improper Neutralization of Special Elements Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of Exim. Authentication is not required to exploit this vulnerability.
The specific flaw exists within the smtp service, which listens on TCP port 25 by default. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of user-supplied data, which can result in a memory corruption condition. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the current process. Was ZDI-CAN-17554.
Exim before 4.99.1, with certain non-default rate-limit configurations, allows a remote heap-based buffer overflow because database records are cast directly to internal structures without validation.
In Exim before 4.99.2, when JSON lookup is enabled, an out-of-bounds heap write can occur when a JSON operator encounters malformed JSON in an untrusted header, because of an incorrect implementation of \ skipping.
In Exim before 4.99.2, when the SPA authentication driver is used with an adversarial SPA resource, there can be an out-of-bounds write that crashes the connection instance, or erroneous data processing that divulges data from uninitialized heap memory.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 has Improper Neutralization of Line Delimiters. An authenticated remote SMTP client can insert newline characters into a spool file (which indirectly leads to remote code execution as root) via AUTH= in a MAIL FROM command.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 allows Execution with Unnecessary Privileges. Because Exim operates as root in the log directory (owned by a non-root user), a symlink or hard link attack allows overwriting critical root-owned files anywhere on the filesystem.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 allows Execution with Unnecessary Privileges. Because Exim operates as root in the spool directory (owned by a non-root user), an attacker can write to a /var/spool/exim4/input spool header file, in which a crafted recipient address can indirectly lead to command execution.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 allows Integer Overflow to Buffer Overflow because get_stdinput allows unbounded reads that are accompanied by unbounded increases in a certain size variable. NOTE: exploitation may be impractical because of the execution time needed to overflow (multiple days).
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 allows Out-of-bounds Write because the main function, while setuid root, copies the current working directory pathname into a buffer that is too small (on some common platforms).
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 allows Heap-based Buffer Overflow in queue_run via two sender options: -R and -S. This may cause privilege escalation from exim to root.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 allows Exposure of File Descriptor to Unintended Control Sphere because rda_interpret uses a privileged pipe that lacks a close-on-exec flag.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 allows Heap-based Buffer Overflow because it mishandles "-F '.('" on the command line, and thus may allow privilege escalation from any user to root. This occurs because of the interpretation of negative sizes in strncpy.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 has Improper Neutralization of Line Delimiters. Local users can alter the behavior of root processes because a recipient address can have a newline character.
A UNIX Symbolic Link (Symlink) Following vulnerability in the packaging of exim in openSUSE Factory allows local attackers to escalate from user mail to root. This issue affects: openSUSE Factory exim versions prior to 4.93.0.4-3.1.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 allows Integer Overflow to Buffer Overflow in receive_add_recipient via an e-mail message with fifty million recipients. NOTE: remote exploitation may be difficult because of resource consumption.
Exim 4 before 4.92 allows Integer Overflow to Buffer Overflow, in which an unauthenticated remote attacker can execute arbitrary code by leveraging the mishandling of continuation lines during header-length restriction.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 has Improper Restriction of Write Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer. This occurs when processing name=value pairs within MAIL FROM and RCPT TO commands.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 allows Buffer Underwrite that may result in unauthenticated remote attackers executing arbitrary commands, because smtp_ungetc was only intended to push back characters, but can actually push back non-character error codes such as EOF.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 has Improper Neutralization of Line Delimiters, relevant in non-default configurations that enable Delivery Status Notification (DSN). Certain uses of ORCPT= can place a newline into a spool header file, and indirectly allow unauthenticated remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands as root.
Exim AUTH Out-Of-Bounds Write Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of Exim. Authentication is not required to exploit this vulnerability.
The specific flaw exists within the smtp service, which listens on TCP port 25 by default. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of user-supplied data, which can result in a write past the end of a buffer. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the service account.
. Was ZDI-CAN-17434.
Exim SMTP Challenge Stack-based Buffer Overflow Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of Exim. Authentication is not required to exploit this vulnerability.
The specific flaw exists within the handling of NTLM challenge requests. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of the length of user-supplied data prior to copying it to a fixed-length stack-based buffer. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the service account.
. Was ZDI-CAN-17515.
Exim Improper Neutralization of Special Elements Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of Exim. Authentication is not required to exploit this vulnerability.
The specific flaw exists within the smtp service, which listens on TCP port 25 by default. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of user-supplied data, which can result in a memory corruption condition. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the current process. Was ZDI-CAN-17554.
Exim before 4.99.1, with certain non-default rate-limit configurations, allows a remote heap-based buffer overflow because database records are cast directly to internal structures without validation.
In Exim before 4.99.2, when JSON lookup is enabled, an out-of-bounds heap write can occur when a JSON operator encounters malformed JSON in an untrusted header, because of an incorrect implementation of \ skipping.
In Exim before 4.99.2, when the SPA authentication driver is used with an adversarial SPA resource, there can be an out-of-bounds write that crashes the connection instance, or erroneous data processing that divulges data from uninitialized heap memory.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 has Improper Neutralization of Line Delimiters. An authenticated remote SMTP client can insert newline characters into a spool file (which indirectly leads to remote code execution as root) via AUTH= in a MAIL FROM command.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 allows Execution with Unnecessary Privileges. Because Exim operates as root in the log directory (owned by a non-root user), a symlink or hard link attack allows overwriting critical root-owned files anywhere on the filesystem.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 allows Execution with Unnecessary Privileges. Because Exim operates as root in the spool directory (owned by a non-root user), an attacker can write to a /var/spool/exim4/input spool header file, in which a crafted recipient address can indirectly lead to command execution.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 allows Integer Overflow to Buffer Overflow because get_stdinput allows unbounded reads that are accompanied by unbounded increases in a certain size variable. NOTE: exploitation may be impractical because of the execution time needed to overflow (multiple days).
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 allows Out-of-bounds Write because the main function, while setuid root, copies the current working directory pathname into a buffer that is too small (on some common platforms).
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 allows Heap-based Buffer Overflow in queue_run via two sender options: -R and -S. This may cause privilege escalation from exim to root.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 allows Exposure of File Descriptor to Unintended Control Sphere because rda_interpret uses a privileged pipe that lacks a close-on-exec flag.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 allows Heap-based Buffer Overflow because it mishandles "-F '.('" on the command line, and thus may allow privilege escalation from any user to root. This occurs because of the interpretation of negative sizes in strncpy.
Exim 4 before 4.94.2 has Improper Neutralization of Line Delimiters. Local users can alter the behavior of root processes because a recipient address can have a newline character.
A UNIX Symbolic Link (Symlink) Following vulnerability in the packaging of exim in openSUSE Factory allows local attackers to escalate from user mail to root. This issue affects: openSUSE Factory exim versions prior to 4.93.0.4-3.1.