CERTA-2007-AVI-315
Vulnerability from certfr_avis - Published: 2007-07-18 - Updated: 2007-07-18
De multiples vulnérabilités dans les produits CA permettent à une personne malintentionnée distante d'effectuer un déni de service ou d'exécuter du code arbitraire.
Description
Plusieurs vulnérabilités ont été identifiées dans les produits CA. Celles-ci sont dues à des mauvaises validations de données reçues par certaines procédures RPC du Alert Notification Server alert.exe. Ces failles permettent à une personne malintentionnée distante d'effectuer des débordements de mémoire, et donc de causer un déni de service ou d'exécuter du code arbitraire.
Solution
Se référer au bulletin de sécurité de l'éditeur pour l'obtention des correctifs (cf. section Documentation).
None| Vendor | Product | Description | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Microsoft | N/A | CA Protection Suites r3 ; | ||
| Microsoft | Windows | Brightstor ARCserve Client agent pour Windows. | ||
| Microsoft | N/A | Brightstor ARCserve Backup v9.01 ; | ||
| Microsoft | N/A | Brightstor ARCserve Backup r10.5 ; | ||
| Microsoft | N/A | Brightstor ARCserve Backup r11.1 ; | ||
| Microsoft | N/A | Brightstor ARCserve Backup r11.5 ; | ||
| Microsoft | N/A | CA Threat Manager for the Enterprise r8 ; | ||
| Microsoft | Windows | Brightstor ARCserve Backup r11 pour Windows ; |
| Title | Publication Time | Tags | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|||||
{
"$ref": "https://www.cert.ssi.gouv.fr/openapi.json",
"affected_systems": [
{
"description": "CA Protection Suites r3 ;",
"product": {
"name": "N/A",
"vendor": {
"name": "Microsoft",
"scada": false
}
}
},
{
"description": "Brightstor ARCserve Client agent pour Windows.",
"product": {
"name": "Windows",
"vendor": {
"name": "Microsoft",
"scada": false
}
}
},
{
"description": "Brightstor ARCserve Backup v9.01 ;",
"product": {
"name": "N/A",
"vendor": {
"name": "Microsoft",
"scada": false
}
}
},
{
"description": "Brightstor ARCserve Backup r10.5 ;",
"product": {
"name": "N/A",
"vendor": {
"name": "Microsoft",
"scada": false
}
}
},
{
"description": "Brightstor ARCserve Backup r11.1 ;",
"product": {
"name": "N/A",
"vendor": {
"name": "Microsoft",
"scada": false
}
}
},
{
"description": "Brightstor ARCserve Backup r11.5 ;",
"product": {
"name": "N/A",
"vendor": {
"name": "Microsoft",
"scada": false
}
}
},
{
"description": "CA Threat Manager for the Enterprise r8 ;",
"product": {
"name": "N/A",
"vendor": {
"name": "Microsoft",
"scada": false
}
}
},
{
"description": "Brightstor ARCserve Backup r11 pour Windows ;",
"product": {
"name": "Windows",
"vendor": {
"name": "Microsoft",
"scada": false
}
}
}
],
"affected_systems_content": null,
"content": "## Description\n\nPlusieurs vuln\u00e9rabilit\u00e9s ont \u00e9t\u00e9 identifi\u00e9es dans les produits CA.\nCelles-ci sont dues \u00e0 des mauvaises validations de donn\u00e9es re\u00e7ues par\ncertaines proc\u00e9dures RPC du Alert Notification Server alert.exe. Ces\nfailles permettent \u00e0 une personne malintentionn\u00e9e distante d\u0027effectuer\ndes d\u00e9bordements de m\u00e9moire, et donc de causer un d\u00e9ni de service ou\nd\u0027ex\u00e9cuter du code arbitraire.\n\n## Solution\n\nSe r\u00e9f\u00e9rer au bulletin de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 de l\u0027\u00e9diteur pour l\u0027obtention des\ncorrectifs (cf. section Documentation).\n",
"cves": [
{
"name": "CVE-2007-3825",
"url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2007-3825"
}
],
"initial_release_date": "2007-07-18T00:00:00",
"last_revision_date": "2007-07-18T00:00:00",
"links": [],
"reference": "CERTA-2007-AVI-315",
"revisions": [
{
"description": "version initiale.",
"revision_date": "2007-07-18T00:00:00.000000"
}
],
"risks": [
{
"description": "D\u00e9ni de service \u00e0 distance"
},
{
"description": "Ex\u00e9cution de code arbitraire \u00e0 distance"
}
],
"summary": "De multiples vuln\u00e9rabilit\u00e9s dans les produits CA permettent \u00e0 une\npersonne malintentionn\u00e9e distante d\u0027effectuer un d\u00e9ni de service ou\nd\u0027ex\u00e9cuter du code arbitraire.\n",
"title": "Multiples vuln\u00e9rabilit\u00e9s dans les produits CA",
"vendor_advisories": [
{
"published_at": null,
"title": "Bulletin de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 CA du 17 juillet 2007",
"url": "http://supportconnectw.ca.com/public/antivirus/infodocs/caantivirus-secnotice.asp"
}
]
}
Drag nodes to arrange them. Double-click a related vulnerability to open it, or a source to visit its link. The Physics button on the left tunes the layout and the simulation; the legend at the bottom left hides or shows nodes by kind and by sighting type.
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date | Other |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Vulnerability timeline
Sightings and recorded dates, grouped by day · UTC
How durations are calculated
Following the VTEM framework (Black Hat USA 2015), time to patch starts when the vendor or a coordinator was informed, total time to patch at discovery, and disclosure to patch at public disclosure; vendor response time runs from the report to its acknowledgement. Time to exploit and time unpatched start at the earliest discovery or report, falling back to public disclosure. Unpatched time ends at the first recorded patch, or the calculation time when no patch is recorded. Exploitation to patch shows the interval between those two events; a published proof of concept is a public exploit, not exploitation.
Each result shows its source dates. A negative interval means the end event came first; when date-only inputs leave the order open, the result says so. Date-only inputs are approximate. The earliest evidence wins: KEV report dates and sightings are labelled as such. Records describing another vulnerability are listed but never calculated from, and a PoC alone does not establish exploitation. Missing patch evidence does not prove that no patch exists. Filters below change the event list only.
Loading timeline…
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
Browse all ATT&CK techniques and the vulnerabilities related to each.
Related by attack behaviour
Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.