Filtered by vendor Sendmail Subscriptions
Filtered by product Sendmail Subscriptions
Total 33 CVE
CVE Vendors Products Updated CVSS v3.1
CVE-2002-2261 1 Sendmail 1 Sendmail 2025-04-03 N/A
Sendmail 8.9.0 through 8.12.6 allows remote attackers to bypass relaying restrictions enforced by the 'check_relay' function by spoofing a blank DNS hostname.
CVE-2003-0681 9 Apple, Gentoo, Hp and 6 more 15 Mac Os X, Mac Os X Server, Linux and 12 more 2025-04-03 N/A
A "potential buffer overflow in ruleset parsing" for Sendmail 8.12.9, when using the nonstandard rulesets (1) recipient (2), final, or (3) mailer-specific envelope recipients, has unknown consequences.
CVE-2005-2070 1 Sendmail 1 Sendmail 2025-04-03 N/A
The ClamAV Mail fILTER (clamav-milter) 0.84 through 0.85d, when used in Sendmail using long timeouts, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service by keeping an open connection, which prevents ClamAV from reloading.
CVE-2006-1173 2 Redhat, Sendmail 2 Enterprise Linux, Sendmail 2025-04-03 N/A
Sendmail before 8.13.7 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service via deeply nested, malformed multipart MIME messages that exhaust the stack during the recursive mime8to7 function for performing 8-bit to 7-bit conversion, which prevents Sendmail from delivering queued messages and might lead to disk consumption by core dump files.
CVE-2001-1349 2 Redhat, Sendmail 2 Linux, Sendmail 2025-04-03 N/A
Sendmail before 8.11.4, and 8.12.0 before 8.12.0.Beta10, allows local users to cause a denial of service and possibly corrupt the heap and gain privileges via race conditions in signal handlers.
CVE-1999-1309 1 Sendmail 1 Sendmail 2025-04-03 N/A
Sendmail before 8.6.7 allows local users to gain root access via a large value in the debug (-d) command line option.
CVE-2001-0715 1 Sendmail 1 Sendmail 2025-04-03 N/A
Sendmail before 8.12.1, without the RestrictQueueRun option enabled, allows local users to obtain potentially sensitive information about the mail queue by setting debugging flags to enable debug mode.
CVE-2002-1165 3 Netbsd, Redhat, Sendmail 4 Netbsd, Enterprise Linux, Linux and 1 more 2025-04-03 N/A
Sendmail Consortium's Restricted Shell (SMRSH) in Sendmail 8.12.6, 8.11.6-15, and possibly other versions after 8.11 from 5/19/1998, allows attackers to bypass the intended restrictions of smrsh by inserting additional commands after (1) "||" sequences or (2) "/" characters, which are not properly filtered or verified.
CVE-2002-1337 8 Gentoo, Hp, Netbsd and 5 more 11 Linux, Alphaserver Sc, Hp-ux and 8 more 2025-04-03 N/A
Buffer overflow in Sendmail 5.79 to 8.12.7 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via certain formatted address fields, related to sender and recipient header comments as processed by the crackaddr function of headers.c.
CVE-2002-2423 1 Sendmail 1 Sendmail 2025-04-03 N/A
Sendmail 8.12.0 through 8.12.6 truncates log messages longer than 100 characters, which allows remote attackers to prevent the IP address from being logged via a long IDENT response.
CVE-2003-0694 12 Apple, Compaq, Freebsd and 9 more 20 Mac Os X, Mac Os X Server, Tru64 and 17 more 2025-04-03 N/A
The prescan function in Sendmail 8.12.9 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via buffer overflow attacks, as demonstrated using the parseaddr function in parseaddr.c.
CVE-2023-51765 3 Freebsd, Redhat, Sendmail 3 Freebsd, Enterprise Linux, Sendmail 2024-11-21 5.3 Medium
sendmail through 8.17.2 allows SMTP smuggling in certain configurations. Remote attackers can use a published exploitation technique to inject e-mail messages with a spoofed MAIL FROM address, allowing bypass of an SPF protection mechanism. This occurs because sendmail supports <LF>.<CR><LF> but some other popular e-mail servers do not. This is resolved in 8.18 and later versions with 'o' in srv_features.
CVE-2021-3618 5 Debian, F5, Fedoraproject and 2 more 5 Debian Linux, Nginx, Fedora and 2 more 2024-11-21 7.4 High
ALPACA is an application layer protocol content confusion attack, exploiting TLS servers implementing different protocols but using compatible certificates, such as multi-domain or wildcard certificates. A MiTM attacker having access to victim's traffic at the TCP/IP layer can redirect traffic from one subdomain to another, resulting in a valid TLS session. This breaks the authentication of TLS and cross-protocol attacks may be possible where the behavior of one protocol service may compromise the other at the application layer.