<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
    <link>https://db.gcve.eu</link>
    <description>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</description>
    <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>
    <generator>python-feedgen</generator>
    <language>en</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2026 18:49:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>fkie_cve-2025-32874</title>
      <link>https://db.gcve.eu/vuln/fkie_cve-2025-32874</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;An issue was discovered in Kaseya Rapid Fire Tools Network Detective through 2.0.16.0. A vulnerability exists in the EncryptionUtil class because symmetric encryption is implemented in a deterministic and non-randomized fashion. The method Encrypt(byte[] clearData) derives both the encryption key and the IV from a fixed, hardcoded input by using a static salt value. As a result, identical plaintext inputs always produce identical ciphertext outputs. This is true for both FIPS and non-FIPS generated passwords. In other words, there is a cryptographic implementation flaw in the password encryption mechanism. Although there are multiple encryption methods grouped under FIPS and non-FIPS classifications, the logic consistently results in predictable and reversible encrypted outputs due to the lack of per-operation randomness and encryption authentication.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;An issue was discovered in Kaseya Rapid Fire Tools Network Detective through 2.0.16.0. A vulnerability exists in the EncryptionUtil class because symmetric encryption is implemented in a deterministic and non-randomized fashion. The method Encrypt(byte[] clearData) derives both the encryption key and the IV from a fixed, hardcoded input by using a static salt value. As a result, identical plaintext inputs always produce identical ciphertext outputs. This is true for both FIPS and non-FIPS generated passwords. In other words, there is a cryptographic implementation flaw in the password encryption mechanism. Although there are multiple encryption methods grouped under FIPS and non-FIPS classifications, the logic consistently results in predictable and reversible encrypted outputs due to the lack of per-operation randomness and encryption authentication.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://db.gcve.eu/vuln/fkie_cve-2025-32874</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>GHSA-fm6w-39g9-r4vh</title>
      <link>https://db.gcve.eu/vuln/ghsa-fm6w-39g9-r4vh</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;An issue was discovered in Kaseya Rapid Fire Tools Network Detective through 2.0.16.0. A vulnerability exists in the EncryptionUtil class because symmetric encryption is implemented in a deterministic and non-randomized fashion. The method Encrypt(byte[] clearData) derives both the encryption key and the IV from a fixed, hardcoded input by using a static salt value. As a result, identical plaintext inputs always produce identical ciphertext outputs. This is true for both FIPS and non-FIPS generated passwords. In other words, there is a cryptographic implementation flaw in the password encryption mechanism. Although there are multiple encryption methods grouped under FIPS and non-FIPS classifications, the logic consistently results in predictable and reversible encrypted outputs due to the lack of per-operation randomness and encryption authentication.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;An issue was discovered in Kaseya Rapid Fire Tools Network Detective through 2.0.16.0. A vulnerability exists in the EncryptionUtil class because symmetric encryption is implemented in a deterministic and non-randomized fashion. The method Encrypt(byte[] clearData) derives both the encryption key and the IV from a fixed, hardcoded input by using a static salt value. As a result, identical plaintext inputs always produce identical ciphertext outputs. This is true for both FIPS and non-FIPS generated passwords. In other words, there is a cryptographic implementation flaw in the password encryption mechanism. Although there are multiple encryption methods grouped under FIPS and non-FIPS classifications, the logic consistently results in predictable and reversible encrypted outputs due to the lack of per-operation randomness and encryption authentication.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://db.gcve.eu/vuln/ghsa-fm6w-39g9-r4vh</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
