#git

### Impact Prior to `ethereum` crate v0.18.0, signature malleability (according to EIP-2) was only checked for "legacy" transactions, but not for EIP-2930, EIP-1559 and EIP-7702 transactions. This is a specification deviation and therefore a high severity advisory if the `ethereum` crate is used for Ethereum mainnet. Note that signature malleability itself is not a security issue, and therefore if the `ethereum` crate is used on a single-implementation blockchain, it's a low/informational severity advisory. ### Patches The issue is fixed in `ethereum` v0.18.0 ### Workarounds You can also manually check transaction malleability outside of the crate. But it's recommended to simply upgrade the version. ### References See PR: https://github.com/rust-ethereum/ethereum/pull/67

Australian airline Qantas has confirmed a data breach at a third party provider that affects six million customers.

User claims to sell stolen Verizon and T-Mobile data for millions of users (online Verizon says data is old T-Mobile denies any breach and links to it.

With nearly 80% of cyber threats now mimicking legitimate user behavior, how are top SOCs determining what’s legitimate traffic and what is potentially dangerous? Where do you turn when firewalls and endpoint detection and response (EDR) fall short at detecting the most important threats to your organization? Breaches at edge devices and VPN gateways have risen from 3% to 22%, according to

Unknown threat actors have been observed weaponizing v0, a generative artificial intelligence (AI) tool from Vercel, to design fake sign-in pages that impersonate their legitimate counterparts. "This observation signals a new evolution in the weaponization of Generative AI by threat actors who have demonstrated an ability to generate a functional phishing site from simple text prompts," Okta

### Summary This vulnerability affects JUnit's support for writing Open Test Reporting XML files which is an opt-in feature of `junit-platform-reporting`. If a repository is cloned using a GitHub token or other credentials in its URL, for example: ```bash git clone https://${GH_APP}:${GH_TOKEN}@github.com/example/example.git ``` The credentials are captured by `OpenTestReportGeneratingListener` which produces (trimmed for brevity): ```xml <infrastructure> <git:repository originUrl="https://username:[email protected]/example/example.git" /> </infrastructure> ``` ### Details https://github.com/junit-team/junit5/blob/6b7764dac92fd35cb348152d1b37f8726875a4e0/junit-platform-reporting/src/main/java/org/junit/platform/reporting/open/xml/OpenTestReportGeneratingListener.java#L183 I think this should be configurable in some way to exclude select git information or exclude it entirely. ### PoC 1. Clone a repo using a GitHub token as shown above. 2. Enable the listener `junit.platfor...

### Summary Certs generated by v4 contain their private key. ## Details ### Background Recently, I encountered an API in Go that’s easy to misuse: sha512.Sum384 and sha512.New384().Sum look very similar and behave very differently. https://go.dev/play/p/kDCqqoYk84k demonstrates this. I want to discuss extending static analysis to detect this case with the go community, but before I do that, I want to make a best-effort pass at open-source projects to fix the existing bugs. I figured that if there were any vulnerabilities out there, they would be easy to find once that discussion begins, so it’s better to address them early. This work is a hobby project and has no affiliation with my employer, so I may be slow to respond due to existing commitments. ### PoC https://go.dev/play/p/vSW0U3Hq4qk ### Impact [This code](https://github.com/juju/utils/blob/0141ef0ee74a0cac603c5c9e4aff194008722f41/cert/cert.go#L120) (cert.NewLeaf) generates certs with the SubjectKeyId set to `sha512.Ne...

There is a heap buffer overflow when writing a sufficiently large (>64k encoded with default settings) image in the DDS format due to writing into a buffer without checking for available space. This only affects users who save untrusted data as a compressed DDS image. * Unclear how large the potential write could be. It is likely limited by process segfault, so it's not necessarily deterministic. It may be practically unbounded. * Unclear if there's a restriction on the bytes that could be emitted. It's likely that the only restriction is that the bytes would be emitted in chunks of 8 or 16. This was introduced in Pillow 11.2.0 when the feature was added.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has issued a warning about a scam where criminals pretend to be…

Researchers have found a set of vulnerabilities in Bluetooth connected devices that could allow an attacker to spy on users.