[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"$fmYbyavkfBXTXz0K0zS7H4rhinj22J5MgsKSEgnrIAt8":3,"g5a-ex:oracle\u002Fcommunications_session_border_controller@*":143,"g5a-family:oracle\u002Fcommunications_session_border_controller":145},{"success":4,"data":5},true,{"product":6,"versions":47,"topVulnerabilitiesByEpss":60,"kevVulnerabilities":120,"seoMetadata":121,"meta":140},{"vendorName":7,"productName":8,"versionCount":9,"totalCves":10,"kevCount":11,"lastCveUpdate":12,"versions":13,"description":46},"oracle","communications_session_border_controller",12,22,0,"2021-10-20",[14,18,20,23,26,29,32,34,36,39,41,43],{"version":15,"cve_count":16,"kev_count":11,"has_kev":17},"7.2.0",1,false,{"version":19,"cve_count":16,"kev_count":11,"has_kev":17},"7.4",{"version":21,"cve_count":22,"kev_count":11,"has_kev":17},"8.0.0",7,{"version":24,"cve_count":25,"kev_count":11,"has_kev":17},"8.1.0",6,{"version":27,"cve_count":28,"kev_count":11,"has_kev":17},"8.2",3,{"version":30,"cve_count":31,"kev_count":11,"has_kev":17},"8.2.0",5,{"version":33,"cve_count":31,"kev_count":11,"has_kev":17},"8.3",{"version":35,"cve_count":9,"kev_count":11,"has_kev":17},"8.4",{"version":37,"cve_count":38,"kev_count":11,"has_kev":17},"9.0",10,{"version":40,"cve_count":16,"kev_count":11,"has_kev":17},"cz8.2",{"version":42,"cve_count":16,"kev_count":11,"has_kev":17},"cz8.3",{"version":44,"cve_count":45,"kev_count":11,"has_kev":17},"cz8.4",2,"Communications Session Border Controller by Oracle is a technology product with 12 tracked versions and 22 known security vulnerabilities. Get comprehensive security analysis, vulnerability tracking, and threat intelligence for this product.",[48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59],{"version":15,"cve_count":16,"kev_count":11,"has_kev":17},{"version":19,"cve_count":16,"kev_count":11,"has_kev":17},{"version":21,"cve_count":22,"kev_count":11,"has_kev":17},{"version":24,"cve_count":25,"kev_count":11,"has_kev":17},{"version":27,"cve_count":28,"kev_count":11,"has_kev":17},{"version":30,"cve_count":31,"kev_count":11,"has_kev":17},{"version":33,"cve_count":31,"kev_count":11,"has_kev":17},{"version":35,"cve_count":9,"kev_count":11,"has_kev":17},{"version":37,"cve_count":38,"kev_count":11,"has_kev":17},{"version":40,"cve_count":16,"kev_count":11,"has_kev":17},{"version":42,"cve_count":16,"kev_count":11,"has_kev":17},{"version":44,"cve_count":45,"kev_count":11,"has_kev":17},[61,68,75,82,87,93,98,105,111,115],{"cveId":62,"description":63,"publishedDate":64,"cvssScore":38,"cvssVersion":65,"severity":66,"isKev":17,"epssScore":67},"CVE-2015-0235","Heap-based buffer overflow in the __nss_hostname_digits_dots function in glibc 2.2, and other 2.x versions before 2.18, allows context-dependent attackers to execute arbitrary code via vectors related to the (1) gethostbyname or (2) gethostbyname2 function, aka \"GHOST.\"","2015-01-28","v2","Critical",0.94558,{"cveId":69,"description":70,"publishedDate":71,"cvssScore":72,"cvssVersion":73,"severity":66,"isKev":17,"epssScore":74},"CVE-2021-3711","In order to decrypt SM2 encrypted data an application is expected to call the API function EVP_PKEY_decrypt(). Typically an application will call this function twice. The first time, on entry, the \"out\" parameter can be NULL and, on exit, the \"outlen\" parameter is populated with the buffer size required to hold the decrypted plaintext. The application can then allocate a sufficiently sized buffer and call EVP_PKEY_decrypt() again, but this time passing a non-NULL value for the \"out\" parameter. A bug in the implementation of the SM2 decryption code means that the calculation of the buffer size required to hold the plaintext returned by the first call to EVP_PKEY_decrypt() can be smaller than the actual size required by the second call. This can lead to a buffer overflow when EVP_PKEY_decrypt() is called by the application a second time with a buffer that is too small. A malicious attacker who is able present SM2 content for decryption to an application could cause attacker chosen data to overflow the buffer by up to a maximum of 62 bytes altering the contents of other data held after the buffer, possibly changing application behaviour or causing the application to crash. The location of the buffer is application dependent but is typically heap allocated. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1l (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1k).","2021-08-24",9.8,"v3.1",0.87816,{"cveId":76,"description":77,"publishedDate":78,"cvssScore":79,"cvssVersion":73,"severity":80,"isKev":17,"epssScore":81},"CVE-2021-23017","A security issue in nginx resolver was identified, which might allow an attacker who is able to forge UDP packets from the DNS server to cause 1-byte memory overwrite, resulting in worker process crash or potential other impact.","2021-06-01",7.7,"High",0.53461,{"cveId":83,"description":84,"publishedDate":71,"cvssScore":85,"cvssVersion":73,"severity":80,"isKev":17,"epssScore":86},"CVE-2021-3712","ASN.1 strings are represented internally within OpenSSL as an ASN1_STRING structure which contains a buffer holding the string data and a field holding the buffer length. This contrasts with normal C strings which are repesented as a buffer for the string data which is terminated with a NUL (0) byte. Although not a strict requirement, ASN.1 strings that are parsed using OpenSSL's own \"d2i\" functions (and other similar parsing functions) as well as any string whose value has been set with the ASN1_STRING_set() function will additionally NUL terminate the byte array in the ASN1_STRING structure. However, it is possible for applications to directly construct valid ASN1_STRING structures which do not NUL terminate the byte array by directly setting the \"data\" and \"length\" fields in the ASN1_STRING array. This can also happen by using the ASN1_STRING_set0() function. Numerous OpenSSL functions that print ASN.1 data have been found to assume that the ASN1_STRING byte array will be NUL terminated, even though this is not guaranteed for strings that have been directly constructed. Where an application requests an ASN.1 structure to be printed, and where that ASN.1 structure contains ASN1_STRINGs that have been directly constructed by the application without NUL terminating the \"data\" field, then a read buffer overrun can occur. The same thing can also occur during name constraints processing of certificates (for example if a certificate has been directly constructed by the application instead of loading it via the OpenSSL parsing functions, and the certificate contains non NUL terminated ASN1_STRING structures). It can also occur in the X509_get1_email(), X509_REQ_get1_email() and X509_get1_ocsp() functions. If a malicious actor can cause an application to directly construct an ASN1_STRING and then process it through one of the affected OpenSSL functions then this issue could be hit. This might result in a crash (causing a Denial of Service attack). It could also result in the disclosure of private memory contents (such as private keys, or sensitive plaintext). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1l (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1k). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2za (Affected 1.0.2-1.0.2y).",7.4,0.50445,{"cveId":88,"description":89,"publishedDate":90,"cvssScore":91,"cvssVersion":73,"severity":80,"isKev":17,"epssScore":92},"CVE-2021-23337","Lodash versions prior to 4.17.21 are vulnerable to Command Injection via the template function.","2021-02-15",7.2,0.21333,{"cveId":94,"description":95,"publishedDate":96,"cvssScore":72,"cvssVersion":73,"severity":66,"isKev":17,"epssScore":97},"CVE-2019-5482","Heap buffer overflow in the TFTP protocol handler in cURL 7.19.4 to 7.65.3.","2019-09-16",0.17939,{"cveId":99,"description":100,"publishedDate":101,"cvssScore":102,"cvssVersion":73,"severity":103,"isKev":17,"epssScore":104},"CVE-2019-1559","If an application encounters a fatal protocol error and then calls SSL_shutdown() twice (once to send a close_notify, and once to receive one) then OpenSSL can respond differently to the calling application if a 0 byte record is received with invalid padding compared to if a 0 byte record is received with an invalid MAC. If the application then behaves differently based on that in a way that is detectable to the remote peer, then this amounts to a padding oracle that could be used to decrypt data. In order for this to be exploitable \"non-stitched\" ciphersuites must be in use. Stitched ciphersuites are optimised implementations of certain commonly used ciphersuites. Also the application must call SSL_shutdown() twice even if a protocol error has occurred (applications should not do this but some do anyway). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2r (Affected 1.0.2-1.0.2q).","2019-02-27",5.9,"Medium",0.17139,{"cveId":106,"description":107,"publishedDate":108,"cvssScore":109,"cvssVersion":73,"severity":80,"isKev":17,"epssScore":110},"CVE-2021-33909","fs\u002Fseq_file.c in the Linux kernel 3.16 through 5.13.x before 5.13.4 does not properly restrict seq buffer allocations, leading to an integer overflow, an Out-of-bounds Write, and escalation to root by an unprivileged user, aka CID-8cae8cd89f05.","2021-07-20",7.8,0.09729,{"cveId":112,"description":113,"publishedDate":96,"cvssScore":72,"cvssVersion":73,"severity":66,"isKev":17,"epssScore":114},"CVE-2019-5481","Double-free vulnerability in the FTP-kerberos code in cURL 7.52.0 to 7.65.3.",0.07465,{"cveId":116,"description":117,"publishedDate":90,"cvssScore":118,"cvssVersion":73,"severity":103,"isKev":17,"epssScore":119},"CVE-2020-28500","Lodash versions prior to 4.17.21 are vulnerable to Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) via the toNumber, trim and trimEnd functions.",5.3,0.07336,[],{"title":122,"metaDescription":123,"keywords":124,"structuredData":125},"Communications Session Border Controller by Oracle - Security Vulnerabilities & Analysis | Precursor Intelligence","Comprehensive security analysis for Communications Session Border Controller by Oracle covering 12 versions with 22 tracked vulnerabilities. Real-time threat intelligence, CVE tracking, and security recommendations.","Communications Session Border Controller vulnerabilities, Communications Session Border Controller security, Communications Session Border Controller CVE, Oracle Communications Session Border Controller, Communications Session Border Controller threat intelligence, Oracle security, product security analysis, cybersecurity threats, vulnerability management, CVE tracking",{"@context":126,"@type":127,"name":128,"description":123,"url":129,"manufacturer":130,"applicationCategory":134,"softwareVersion":135,"mainEntity":136},"https:\u002F\u002Fschema.org","SoftwareApplication","Communications Session Border Controller","https:\u002F\u002Fprecursorintelligence.com\u002Fvulnerabilities\u002Ftechnologies\u002Fvendors\u002Foracle\u002Fcommunications_session_border_controller",{"@type":131,"name":132,"url":133},"Organization","Oracle","https:\u002F\u002Fprecursorintelligence.com\u002Fvendors\u002Foracle","Security Software","12 versions tracked",{"@type":137,"name":138,"description":139,"vulnerabilityCount":10,"dateModified":12},"SecurityVulnerability","Communications Session Border Controller Security Vulnerabilities","Security vulnerabilities affecting Communications Session Border Controller by Oracle",{"totalVersions":9,"totalVulnerabilities":10,"kevVulnerabilities":11,"lastUpdated":12,"generatedAt":141,"apiVersion":142},"2026-10-17T19:08:50.285Z","3.0",{"rows":144,"total":11,"capped":17,"failed":11},[],[]]