| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway did not sufficiently restrict which account a certificate could be assigned to. This could allow an attacker to associate a certificate with another user's account, affecting the confidentiality and integrity of that account's encrypted mail and, where certificate-based login is enabled, potentially permitting unauthorized access to the account. |
| A stored cross-site scripting (XSS) weakness in Kiteworks Core could allow an unauthenticated attacker to store crafted content that later executes arbitrary JavaScript in the authenticated session of an administrator who views the affected page. This could have permitted the attacker to gain full administrative control, including the creation of a new administrative account. |
| A resource exhaustion vulnerability in Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway allowed an unauthenticated remote attacker to repeatedly trigger a comparatively expensive server-side operation, causing a partial denial of service. |
| A system notification template on the Kiteworks appliance was rendered by a template engine that evaluated expressions contained in the stored template body. An authenticated System Administrator could potentially store a crafted template that executed operating-system commands on the appliance when the notification was next sent. |
| Two Kiteworks Core cluster-management operations did not validate file paths supplied to them, so an attacker holding root on one node of a cluster could write files as root onto another node and cause them to be executed there. Exploitation requires backend root access on a cluster node and a pending software patch present on the target node. |
| An authorization check in the large file exchange feature of Kiteworks Email Protection Gateway did not correctly establish that the requesting user was a party to the package being requested. An authenticated user of that optional feature could read the subject, message body, and attachments of packages they neither sent nor received. |
| A stored cross-site scripting (XSS) weakness in Kiteworks Core could allow an administrator holding only a single, narrowly scoped delegated permission to store crafted content that later executes arbitrary JavaScript in the authenticated session of a System Administrator who views the affected page. This could have permitted the lower-privileged administrator to escalate to full administrative control of the tenant, including the creation of a new administrative account. |
| An administrative import function in Kiteworks Core did not verify that the requesting administrator was entitled to create the privileged integration credential being imported. A delegated administrator holding a single narrowly scoped administrative permission could therefore obtain full system administrator privileges, without any action by an existing system administrator. |
| Kiteworks Core did not apply its gateway-level API security controls to every request authenticated through the platform's central authentication service. An authenticated user could reach REST API functionality over a request path on which those controls, including enforcement of signed-out and revoked sessions, were not applied. |
| A Kiteworks appliance setup interface did not confine a user-supplied file path to its intended directory, which could allow an unauthenticated attacker to write a file to any location writable by the affected service account, potentially compromising the integrity of the appliance or rendering it unavailable until an operator intervenes. Exploitation requires network access to the affected interface, which is not reachable on a fully configured appliance in its default configuration; reaching it depends on either the transient window while an appliance is first being provisioned or a non-default appliance configuration. |
| Kiteworks did not correctly enforce which roles a shared folder's manager was permitted to assign. In a default configuration, an authenticated user holding the Manager role on a folder could grant the Owner role to themselves or to other members of that folder. |
| A privilege escalation vulnerability in Kiteworks could have allowed an attacker who had already obtained code execution on one node of a clustered Kiteworks deployment to run operating system commands with elevated privileges on another node of the same cluster. Insufficient input validation in an internal cluster management function let attacker-supplied values reach a privileged execution context; exploitation requires existing access to a node in the cluster, and the affected function is not reachable from outside the cluster. |
| A local privilege escalation vulnerability in Kiteworks could have allowed an attacker with an existing shell under a low-privileged service account to escalate to root privileges on the appliance. |
| Kiteworks Core did not correctly validate a parameter submitted to the password reset workflow. An unauthenticated attacker who knew the email address of a user with a locally stored password could potentially reset that account's password without access to the emailed reset link and then authenticate as that user, including where the account holds administrative privileges. |
| A command injection vulnerability in Kiteworks could allow a high-privileged authenticated administrator to execute arbitrary operating-system commands as root on the affected appliance node. Successful exploitation requires an administrative account with elevated privileges. |
| A privilege escalation vulnerability in Kiteworks could allow an attacker who has already obtained code execution as an unprivileged backend service account on the appliance to escalate to root. A privileged routine did not safely handle a filesystem path that the lower-privileged account could influence, allowing the attacker to cause a root-owned operation to run arbitrary commands with the highest privileges. Exploitation requires existing local access to that service account. |
| A privilege escalation vulnerability in Kiteworks could allow an attacker who has already obtained code execution as an unprivileged backend service account on the appliance to escalate to root and run arbitrary commands with the highest privileges. Exploitation requires existing local access to that service account. |
| A function in the Kiteworks Advanced Forms component was reachable without authentication. An unauthenticated attacker could potentially use it to carry out a limited set of internal service operations on the Kiteworks platform; it did not permit access to user accounts, stored files, or form submissions. |
| Kiteworks did not enforce the maximum permitted value for a configurable security-policy setting. An authenticated administrator could set this value outside its intended range so that the associated control never activated, while the control continued to appear enabled in the administrative interface and audit log, allowing it to be silently rendered ineffective. |
| Kiteworks Core contains a business logic flaw in a Kiteworks file-request feature allowed an authenticated user to send a request that appeared to originate from another user, because the server did not verify that the requester was authorized to act as the specified account. This could be used to solicit files or information from a recipient under a trusted identity; exploitation requires the feature to be enabled for the attacker's profile and the targeted recipient to act on the request. |
