[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"$fjnliGc0MvIA2WAduu3L0XCeuNmFgc1RDthi36GgBiow":3},{"success":4,"data":5},true,{"vendor":6,"topVulnerabilitiesByEpss":91,"kevVulnerabilities":150,"topProductsByCves":164,"seoMetadata":175,"meta":184},{"vendorId":7,"vendorName":8,"productCount":9,"cveCount":10,"kevCount":11,"versionCount":12,"lastCveUpdate":13,"firstLetter":14,"products":15,"description":90},31464,"tenable",15,151,3,327,"2025-07-02","t",[16,22,29,35,41,48,53,59,63,66,70,74,78,82,86],{"id":17,"product_name":18,"version_count":19,"cve_count":20,"kev_count":21,"last_cve_update":13},161799,"nessus",153,65,0,{"id":23,"product_name":24,"version_count":25,"cve_count":26,"kev_count":27,"last_cve_update":28},161808,"tenable.sc",12,46,2,"2023-02-01",{"id":30,"product_name":31,"version_count":32,"cve_count":33,"kev_count":21,"last_cve_update":34},161802,"nessus_network_monitor",20,14,"2025-05-23",{"id":36,"product_name":37,"version_count":38,"cve_count":39,"kev_count":21,"last_cve_update":40},161806,"securitycenter",7,10,"2023-06-26",{"id":42,"product_name":43,"version_count":44,"cve_count":45,"kev_count":46,"last_cve_update":47},161798,"log_correlation_engine",5,9,1,"2021-03-25",{"id":49,"product_name":50,"version_count":51,"cve_count":45,"kev_count":21,"last_cve_update":52},161800,"nessus_agent",86,"2025-06-13",{"id":54,"product_name":55,"version_count":56,"cve_count":57,"kev_count":21,"last_cve_update":58},161795,"appliance",36,4,"2018-03-28",{"id":60,"product_name":61,"version_count":46,"cve_count":57,"kev_count":21,"last_cve_update":62},161805,"security_center","2024-06-12",{"id":64,"product_name":65,"version_count":21,"cve_count":27,"kev_count":21,"last_cve_update":40},161807,"tenable.io",{"id":67,"product_name":68,"version_count":21,"cve_count":27,"kev_count":21,"last_cve_update":69},161796,"identity_exposure","2024-07-16",{"id":71,"product_name":72,"version_count":11,"cve_count":27,"kev_count":21,"last_cve_update":73},161809,"web_ui","2014-10-21",{"id":75,"product_name":76,"version_count":46,"cve_count":46,"kev_count":21,"last_cve_update":77},161801,"nessus_amazon_machine_image","2021-02-06",{"id":79,"product_name":80,"version_count":21,"cve_count":46,"kev_count":21,"last_cve_update":81},161797,"jira_cloud","2021-03-10",{"id":83,"product_name":84,"version_count":27,"cve_count":46,"kev_count":21,"last_cve_update":85},161804,"plugin-set","2014-04-11",{"id":87,"product_name":88,"version_count":46,"cve_count":46,"kev_count":21,"last_cve_update":89},161803,"plugin_feed","2023-03-15","Tenable is a technology vendor with 15 tracked products and 151 known security vulnerabilities. Get comprehensive security analysis, vulnerability tracking, and threat intelligence for this vendor.",[92,99,106,114,120,125,130,135,141,145],{"cveId":93,"description":94,"publishedDate":95,"cvssScore":45,"cvssVersion":96,"severity":97,"isKev":4,"epssScore":98},"CVE-2021-40438","A crafted request uri-path can cause mod_proxy to forward the request to an origin server choosen by the remote user. This issue affects Apache HTTP Server 2.4.48 and earlier.","2021-09-16","v3.1","Critical",0.99999,{"cveId":100,"description":101,"publishedDate":102,"cvssScore":103,"cvssVersion":96,"severity":104,"isKev":4,"epssScore":105},"CVE-2019-11043","In PHP versions 7.1.x below 7.1.33, 7.2.x below 7.2.24 and 7.3.x below 7.3.11 in certain configurations of FPM setup it is possible to cause FPM module to write past allocated buffers into the space reserved for FCGI protocol data, thus opening the possibility of remote code execution.","2019-10-28",8.7,"High",0.99748,{"cveId":107,"description":108,"publishedDate":109,"cvssScore":110,"cvssVersion":96,"severity":111,"isKev":112,"epssScore":113},"CVE-2020-11022","In jQuery versions greater than or equal to 1.2 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.","2020-04-29",6.1,"Medium",false,0.99215,{"cveId":115,"description":116,"publishedDate":117,"cvssScore":118,"cvssVersion":96,"severity":97,"isKev":112,"epssScore":119},"CVE-2021-44790","A carefully crafted request body can cause a buffer overflow in the mod_lua multipart parser (r:parsebody() called from Lua scripts). The Apache httpd team is not aware of an exploit for the vulnerabilty though it might be possible to craft one. This issue affects Apache HTTP Server 2.4.51 and earlier.","2021-12-20",9.8,0.9684,{"cveId":121,"description":122,"publishedDate":123,"cvssScore":118,"cvssVersion":96,"severity":97,"isKev":112,"epssScore":124},"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",0.87816,{"cveId":126,"description":127,"publishedDate":109,"cvssScore":128,"cvssVersion":96,"severity":111,"isKev":4,"epssScore":129},"CVE-2020-11023","In jQuery versions greater than or equal to 1.0.3 and before 3.5.0, passing HTML containing \u003Coption> 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.",6.9,0.84887,{"cveId":131,"description":132,"publishedDate":117,"cvssScore":133,"cvssVersion":96,"severity":104,"isKev":112,"epssScore":134},"CVE-2021-44224","A crafted URI sent to httpd configured as a forward proxy (ProxyRequests on) can cause a crash (NULL pointer dereference) or, for configurations mixing forward and reverse proxy declarations, can allow for requests to be directed to a declared Unix Domain Socket endpoint (Server Side Request Forgery). This issue affects Apache HTTP Server 2.4.7 up to 2.4.51 (included).",8.2,0.82295,{"cveId":136,"description":137,"publishedDate":138,"cvssScore":139,"cvssVersion":96,"severity":104,"isKev":112,"epssScore":140},"CVE-2022-0778","The BN_mod_sqrt() function, which computes a modular square root, contains a bug that can cause it to loop forever for non-prime moduli. Internally this function is used when parsing certificates that contain elliptic curve public keys in compressed form or explicit elliptic curve parameters with a base point encoded in compressed form. It is possible to trigger the infinite loop by crafting a certificate that has invalid explicit curve parameters. Since certificate parsing happens prior to verification of the certificate signature, any process that parses an externally supplied certificate may thus be subject to a denial of service attack. The infinite loop can also be reached when parsing crafted private keys as they can contain explicit elliptic curve parameters. Thus vulnerable situations include: - TLS clients consuming server certificates - TLS servers consuming client certificates - Hosting providers taking certificates or private keys from customers - Certificate authorities parsing certification requests from subscribers - Anything else which parses ASN.1 elliptic curve parameters Also any other applications that use the BN_mod_sqrt() where the attacker can control the parameter values are vulnerable to this DoS issue. In the OpenSSL 1.0.2 version the public key is not parsed during initial parsing of the certificate which makes it slightly harder to trigger the infinite loop. However any operation which requires the public key from the certificate will trigger the infinite loop. In particular the attacker can use a self-signed certificate to trigger the loop during verification of the certificate signature. This issue affects OpenSSL versions 1.0.2, 1.1.1 and 3.0. It was addressed in the releases of 1.1.1n and 3.0.2 on the 15th March 2022. Fixed in OpenSSL 3.0.2 (Affected 3.0.0,3.0.1). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1n (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1m). Fixed in OpenSSL 1.0.2zd (Affected 1.0.2-1.0.2zc).","2022-03-15",7.5,0.73188,{"cveId":142,"description":143,"publishedDate":95,"cvssScore":139,"cvssVersion":96,"severity":104,"isKev":112,"epssScore":144},"CVE-2021-34798","Malformed requests may cause the server to dereference a NULL pointer. This issue affects Apache HTTP Server 2.4.48 and earlier.",0.64509,{"cveId":146,"description":147,"publishedDate":47,"cvssScore":148,"cvssVersion":96,"severity":111,"isKev":112,"epssScore":149},"CVE-2021-3449","An OpenSSL TLS server may crash if sent a maliciously crafted renegotiation ClientHello message from a client. If a TLSv1.2 renegotiation ClientHello omits the signature_algorithms extension (where it was present in the initial ClientHello), but includes a signature_algorithms_cert extension then a NULL pointer dereference will result, leading to a crash and a denial of service attack. A server is only vulnerable if it has TLSv1.2 and renegotiation enabled (which is the default configuration). OpenSSL TLS clients are not impacted by this issue. All OpenSSL 1.1.1 versions are affected by this issue. Users of these versions should upgrade to OpenSSL 1.1.1k. OpenSSL 1.0.2 is not impacted by this issue. Fixed in OpenSSL 1.1.1k (Affected 1.1.1-1.1.1j).",5.9,0.63542,[151,156,161],{"cveId":126,"description":127,"publishedDate":109,"cvssScore":128,"cvssVersion":96,"severity":111,"isKev":4,"epssScore":129,"cisaVulnName":152,"cisaDateAdded":153,"cisaShortDescription":154,"cisaRequiredAction":155},"JQuery Cross-Site Scripting (XSS) Vulnerability","2025-01-23","JQuery contains a persistent cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability. When passing maliciously formed, untrusted input enclosed in HTML tags, JQuery's DOM manipulators can execute untrusted code in the context of the user's browser.","Apply mitigations per vendor instructions or discontinue use of the product if mitigations are unavailable.",{"cveId":100,"description":101,"publishedDate":102,"cvssScore":103,"cvssVersion":96,"severity":104,"isKev":4,"epssScore":105,"cisaVulnName":157,"cisaDateAdded":158,"cisaShortDescription":159,"cisaRequiredAction":160},"PHP FastCGI Process Manager (FPM) Buffer Overflow Vulnerability","2022-03-25","In some versions of PHP in certain configurations of FPM setup, it is possible to cause FPM module to write past allocated buffers allowing the possibility of remote code execution.","Apply updates per vendor instructions.",{"cveId":93,"description":94,"publishedDate":95,"cvssScore":45,"cvssVersion":96,"severity":97,"isKev":4,"epssScore":98,"cisaVulnName":162,"cisaDateAdded":163,"cisaShortDescription":94,"cisaRequiredAction":160},"Apache HTTP Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)","2021-12-01",[165,166,167,168,169,170,171,172,173,174],{"id":17,"product_name":18,"version_count":19,"cve_count":20,"kev_count":21,"last_cve_update":13},{"id":23,"product_name":24,"version_count":25,"cve_count":26,"kev_count":27,"last_cve_update":28},{"id":30,"product_name":31,"version_count":32,"cve_count":33,"kev_count":21,"last_cve_update":34},{"id":36,"product_name":37,"version_count":38,"cve_count":39,"kev_count":21,"last_cve_update":40},{"id":42,"product_name":43,"version_count":44,"cve_count":45,"kev_count":46,"last_cve_update":47},{"id":49,"product_name":50,"version_count":51,"cve_count":45,"kev_count":21,"last_cve_update":52},{"id":54,"product_name":55,"version_count":56,"cve_count":57,"kev_count":21,"last_cve_update":58},{"id":60,"product_name":61,"version_count":46,"cve_count":57,"kev_count":21,"last_cve_update":62},{"id":64,"product_name":65,"version_count":21,"cve_count":27,"kev_count":21,"last_cve_update":40},{"id":67,"product_name":68,"version_count":21,"cve_count":27,"kev_count":21,"last_cve_update":69},{"title":176,"metaDescription":177,"keywords":178,"structuredData":179},"Tenable - Security Vulnerabilities & Analysis | Precursor Intelligence","Comprehensive security analysis for Tenable covering 15 products with 151 tracked vulnerabilities including 1 critical and 1 high-severity issues and 3 CISA KEV vulnerabilities. Real-time threat intelligence, CVE tracking, and security recommendations.","Tenable vulnerabilities, Tenable security, Tenable CVE, Tenable threat intelligence, vendor security analysis, cybersecurity threats, vulnerability management, CVE tracking, Tenable KEV, Tenable exploited vulnerabilities",{"@context":180,"@type":181,"name":182,"description":177,"url":183},"https:\u002F\u002Fschema.org","Organization","Tenable","https:\u002F\u002Fprecursorintelligence.com\u002Fvendors\u002Ftenable",{"totalProducts":9,"totalVulnerabilities":10,"kevVulnerabilities":11,"lastUpdated":13,"generatedAt":185,"apiVersion":186},"2026-10-17T03:46:31.711Z","3.0"]