Common Weakness Enumeration

CWE-294

Allowed

Authentication Bypass by Capture-replay

Abstraction: Base · Status: Incomplete

A capture-replay flaw exists when the design of the product makes it possible for a malicious user to sniff network traffic and bypass authentication by replaying it to the server in question to the same effect as the original message (or with minor changes).

342 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.

GHSA-R28C-WJWJ-4XGV

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-02-12 00:31 – Updated: 2026-02-12 18:30
VLAI
Details

Weak Security in the PF-50 1.2 keyfob of PGST PG107 Alarm System 1.25.05.hf allows attackers to compromise access control via a code replay attack.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2025-67135"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-294"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-02-11T23:16:03Z",
    "severity": "CRITICAL"
  },
  "details": "Weak Security in the PF-50 1.2 keyfob of PGST PG107 Alarm System 1.25.05.hf allows attackers to compromise access control via a code replay attack.",
  "id": "GHSA-r28c-wjwj-4xgv",
  "modified": "2026-02-12T18:30:22Z",
  "published": "2026-02-12T00:31:03Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-67135"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://neutsec.io/advisories/cve-2025-67135"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-R2XC-748X-F9RJ

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-06-08 00:00 – Updated: 2022-06-17 00:01
VLAI
Details

joyebike Joy ebike Wolf Manufacturing year 2022 is vulnerable to Authentication Bypass by Capture-replay.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2022-30466"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-294"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2022-06-07T21:15:00Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "joyebike Joy ebike Wolf Manufacturing year 2022 is vulnerable to Authentication Bypass by Capture-replay.",
  "id": "GHSA-r2xc-748x-f9rj",
  "modified": "2022-06-17T00:01:27Z",
  "published": "2022-06-08T00:00:32Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-30466"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/nsbogam/ebike"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-R2XF-JX96-XHHC

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:32 – Updated: 2022-05-24 17:32
VLAI
Details

JUUKO K-800 (Firmware versions prior to numbers ending ...9A, ...9B, ...9C, etc.) is vulnerable to a replay attack and command forgery, which could allow attackers to replay commands, control the device, view commands, or cause the device to stop running.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2018-17932"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-294"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2020-11-02T21:15:00Z",
    "severity": "CRITICAL"
  },
  "details": "JUUKO K-800 (Firmware versions prior to numbers ending ...9A, ...9B, ...9C, etc.) is vulnerable to a replay attack and command forgery, which could allow attackers to replay commands, control the device, view commands, or cause the device to stop running.",
  "id": "GHSA-r2xf-jx96-xhhc",
  "modified": "2022-05-24T17:32:47Z",
  "published": "2022-05-24T17:32:47Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-17932"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://us-cert.cisa.gov/ics/advisories/icsa-20-301-01"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": []
}

GHSA-R796-QQQW-VXRJ

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-11-08 12:00 – Updated: 2022-11-09 19:02
VLAI
Details

A vulnerability has been identified in Mendix SAML Module (Mendix 7 compatible) (All versions < V1.17.0), Mendix SAML Module (Mendix 7 compatible) (All versions >= V1.17.0), Mendix SAML Module (Mendix 8 compatible) (All versions < V2.3.0), Mendix SAML Module (Mendix 8 compatible) (All versions >= V2.3.0 < V2.3.2), Mendix SAML Module (Mendix 9 compatible, New Track) (All versions < V3.3.1), Mendix SAML Module (Mendix 9 compatible, New Track) (All versions >= V3.3.1 < V3.3.5), Mendix SAML Module (Mendix 9 compatible, Upgrade Track) (All versions < V3.3.0), Mendix SAML Module (Mendix 9 compatible, Upgrade Track) (All versions >= V3.3.0 < V3.3.4). Affected versions of the module insufficiently protect from packet capture replay, only when the not recommended, non default configuration option 'Allow Idp Initiated Authentication' is enabled. This CVE entry describes the incomplete fix for CVE-2022-37011 in a specific non default configuration.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2022-44457"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-294"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2022-11-08T11:15:00Z",
    "severity": "CRITICAL"
  },
  "details": "A vulnerability has been identified in Mendix SAML Module (Mendix 7 compatible) (All versions \u003c V1.17.0), Mendix SAML Module (Mendix 7 compatible) (All versions \u003e= V1.17.0), Mendix SAML Module (Mendix 8 compatible) (All versions \u003c V2.3.0), Mendix SAML Module (Mendix 8 compatible) (All versions \u003e= V2.3.0 \u003c V2.3.2), Mendix SAML Module (Mendix 9 compatible, New Track) (All versions \u003c V3.3.1), Mendix SAML Module (Mendix 9 compatible, New Track) (All versions \u003e= V3.3.1 \u003c V3.3.5), Mendix SAML Module (Mendix 9 compatible, Upgrade Track) (All versions \u003c V3.3.0), Mendix SAML Module (Mendix 9 compatible, Upgrade Track) (All versions \u003e= V3.3.0 \u003c V3.3.4). Affected versions of the module insufficiently protect from packet capture replay, only when the not recommended, non default configuration option `\u0027Allow Idp Initiated Authentication\u0027` is enabled. This CVE entry describes the incomplete fix for CVE-2022-37011 in a specific non default configuration.",
  "id": "GHSA-r796-qqqw-vxrj",
  "modified": "2022-11-09T19:02:23Z",
  "published": "2022-11-08T12:00:17Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-44457"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://cert-portal.siemens.com/productcert/pdf/ssa-638652.pdf"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-R837-6RM6-H9PJ

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-07-05 00:00 – Updated: 2022-07-16 00:00
VLAI
Details

Authentication bypass by capture-replay vulnerability exists in Machine automation controller NJ series all models V 1.48 and earlier, Machine automation controller NX7 series all models V1.28 and earlier, Machine automation controller NX1 series all models V1.48 and earlier, Automation software 'Sysmac Studio' all models V1.49 and earlier, and Programmable Terminal (PT) NA series NA5-15W/NA5-12W/NA5-9W/NA5-7W models Runtime V1.15 and earlier, which may allow a remote attacker who can analyze the communication between the affected controller and automation software 'Sysmac Studio' and/or a Programmable Terminal (PT) to access the controller.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2022-33208"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-294"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2022-07-04T02:15:00Z",
    "severity": "HIGH"
  },
  "details": "Authentication bypass by capture-replay vulnerability exists in Machine automation controller NJ series all models V 1.48 and earlier, Machine automation controller NX7 series all models V1.28 and earlier, Machine automation controller NX1 series all models V1.48 and earlier, Automation software \u0027Sysmac Studio\u0027 all models V1.49 and earlier, and Programmable Terminal (PT) NA series NA5-15W/NA5-12W/NA5-9W/NA5-7W models Runtime V1.15 and earlier, which may allow a remote attacker who can analyze the communication between the affected controller and automation software \u0027Sysmac Studio\u0027 and/or a Programmable Terminal (PT) to access the controller.",
  "id": "GHSA-r837-6rm6-h9pj",
  "modified": "2022-07-16T00:00:28Z",
  "published": "2022-07-05T00:00:58Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-33208"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://jvn.jp/en/vu/JVNVU97050784/index.html"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.ia.omron.com/product/vulnerability/OMSR-2022-001_en.pdf"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-R8J8-HMFC-5QH8

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:21 – Updated: 2024-04-04 02:54
VLAI
Details

Tinxy Door Lock with firmware before 3.2 allow attackers to unlock a door by replaying an Unlock request that occurred when the attacker was previously authorized. In other words, door-access revocation is mishandled.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2020-9438"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-294"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2020-06-23T15:15:00Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "Tinxy Door Lock with firmware before 3.2 allow attackers to unlock a door by replaying an Unlock request that occurred when the attacker was previously authorized. In other words, door-access revocation is mishandled.",
  "id": "GHSA-r8j8-hmfc-5qh8",
  "modified": "2024-04-04T02:54:27Z",
  "published": "2022-05-24T17:21:31Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-9438"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://medium.com/%40avishek_75733/smart-products-are-always-not-that-smart-tinxy-smart-door-lock-vulnerability-97f91e435e06"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://medium.com/@avishek_75733/smart-products-are-always-not-that-smart-tinxy-smart-door-lock-vulnerability-97f91e435e06"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-R9Q5-C7QC-P26W

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-03-03 23:08 – Updated: 2026-03-19 21:18
VLAI
Summary
OpenClaw's Nextcloud Talk webhook replay could trigger duplicate inbound processing
Details

Summary

When Nextcloud Talk webhook signing was valid, replayed requests could be accepted without durable replay suppression, allowing duplicate inbound processing after replay-window expiry or process restart.

Details

OpenClaw's Nextcloud Talk webhook path verified HMAC(secret, random + body) but previously lacked durable replay state tied to webhook events. This allowed replay of a previously valid signed request in some operational conditions.

The fix on main adds: - persistent per-account replay dedupe for Nextcloud Talk webhook events, - replay checks before webhook side effects (onMessage), - backend-origin validation against configured account base URL (when configured).

Impact

A captured valid signed webhook request could be replayed to trigger duplicate inbound handling. This is an integrity/availability issue (duplicate actions/noise), scoped to deployments using Nextcloud Talk webhook integration.

Affected Packages / Versions

  • Package: openclaw (npm)
  • Affected: <= 2026.2.24
  • Patched in release: 2026.2.25

Fix Commit(s)

  • d512163d686ad6741783e7119ddb3437f493dbbc

Release Process Note

patched_versions is pre-set to the release (2026.2.25) so once npm release 2026.2.25 is published, advisory is now published.

OpenClaw thanks @aristorechina for reporting.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 2026.2.24"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "npm",
        "name": "openclaw"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "2026.2.25"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-28449"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-294"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-03-03T23:08:55Z",
    "nvd_published_at": null,
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "### Summary\nWhen Nextcloud Talk webhook signing was valid, replayed requests could be accepted without durable replay suppression, allowing duplicate inbound processing after replay-window expiry or process restart.\n\n### Details\nOpenClaw\u0027s Nextcloud Talk webhook path verified `HMAC(secret, random + body)` but previously lacked durable replay state tied to webhook events. This allowed replay of a previously valid signed request in some operational conditions.\n\nThe fix on `main` adds:\n- persistent per-account replay dedupe for Nextcloud Talk webhook events,\n- replay checks before webhook side effects (`onMessage`),\n- backend-origin validation against configured account base URL (when configured).\n\n### Impact\nA captured valid signed webhook request could be replayed to trigger duplicate inbound handling. This is an integrity/availability issue (duplicate actions/noise), scoped to deployments using Nextcloud Talk webhook integration.\n\n### Affected Packages / Versions\n- Package: `openclaw` (npm)\n- Affected: `\u003c= 2026.2.24`\n- Patched in release: `2026.2.25`\n\n### Fix Commit(s)\n- `d512163d686ad6741783e7119ddb3437f493dbbc`\n\n### Release Process Note\n`patched_versions` is pre-set to the release (`2026.2.25`) so once npm release `2026.2.25` is published, advisory is now published.\n\nOpenClaw thanks @aristorechina for reporting.",
  "id": "GHSA-r9q5-c7qc-p26w",
  "modified": "2026-03-19T21:18:54Z",
  "published": "2026-03-03T23:08:55Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/security/advisories/GHSA-r9q5-c7qc-p26w"
    },
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-28449"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw/commit/d512163d686ad6741783e7119ddb3437f493dbbc"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/openclaw/openclaw"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.vulncheck.com/advisories/openclaw-webhook-replay-attack-via-missing-durable-replay-suppression"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "OpenClaw\u0027s Nextcloud Talk webhook replay could trigger duplicate inbound processing"
}

GHSA-RC6V-5RMX-W5MV

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-05-15 18:13 – Updated: 2026-06-09 10:34
VLAI
Summary
arnika is affected by medium-severity issues in UDP rotation, PQC handling, and KMS TLS
Details

Summary

Three medium-severity issues in arnika affecting the UDP key-rotation protocol, PQC key file handling, and KMS TLS client. All require specific preconditions to exploit and do not allow direct code execution or immediate key extraction. A self-contained PoC is attached.

Details

1) ACK timestamp not validated: udpserver.go:185 udpClient() verifies HMAC and packet type but never checks ackPkt.Timestamp. A MITM can capture one ACK, drop all subsequent DATA packets, and replay the stale ACK indefinitely. Primary advances PSK each rotation, backup stays on key 1, tunnel breaks. No PSK knowledge needed. The server side already has this check, the client does not. Fix: mirror the timestamp check already present on the server side.

2) Empty PQC key file silently accepted: repositories/pqc.go:29 os.ReadFile follows symlinks. Empty file to base64.Decode("") = []byte{}, nil. HKDF runs on the QKD key alone while arnika logs [OK] HKDF derivation completed for QKD+PQC key. Requires write access to the directory containing PQC_PSK_FILE. Fix: validate decoded key is non-empty before derivation; enforce parent directory permissions in SECURITY.md.

3) InsecureSkipVerify: true hardcoded: repositories/kms.go:61 KMS HTTP client unconditionally sets InsecureSkipVerify: true, overriding RootCAs. CA_CERTIFICATE is loaded but never consulted (dead code). Requires MITM between arnika and the KMS endpoint, which in typical deployments are co-located. Fix: remove the flag; RootCAs already holds the correct pool when CA_CERTIFICATE is configured.

PoC

See arnika_exploit.tar.gz. PoC shows observable behavior for each attack; the third one (KMS MITM) needs no custom code, any HTTPS proxy with a self-signed cert is enough.

Impact

Issues require network MITM or local directory write access to exploit. No direct key extraction or code execution. Primary impact is tunnel desync and silent security downgrade in hybrid QKD+PQC mode.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "database_specific": {
        "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 1.0.0"
      },
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "Go",
        "name": "github.com/arnika-project/arnika"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "1.0.1"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-294",
      "CWE-295",
      "CWE-345"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": true,
    "github_reviewed_at": "2026-05-15T18:13:57Z",
    "nvd_published_at": null,
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "### Summary\nThree medium-severity issues in arnika affecting the UDP key-rotation protocol, PQC key file handling, and KMS TLS client. All require specific preconditions to exploit and do not allow direct code execution or immediate key extraction. A self-contained PoC is attached.\n\n### Details\n1) ACK timestamp not validated: `udpserver.go:185`\n`udpClient()` verifies HMAC and packet type but never checks `ackPkt.Timestamp`. A MITM can capture one ACK, drop all subsequent DATA packets, and replay the stale ACK indefinitely. Primary advances PSK each rotation, backup stays on key 1, tunnel breaks. No PSK knowledge needed. The server side already has this check, the client does not.\n**Fix**: mirror the timestamp check already present on the server side.\n\n2) Empty PQC key file silently accepted: `repositories/pqc.go:29`\n`os.ReadFile` follows symlinks. Empty file to `base64.Decode(\"\") = []byte{}, nil`. HKDF runs on the QKD key alone while arnika logs `[OK] HKDF derivation completed for QKD+PQC key`. Requires write access to the directory containing `PQC_PSK_FILE`.\n**Fix**: validate decoded key is non-empty before derivation; enforce parent directory permissions in `SECURITY.md`.\n\n3) `InsecureSkipVerify: true` hardcoded: `repositories/kms.go:61`\nKMS HTTP client unconditionally sets `InsecureSkipVerify: true`, overriding `RootCAs`. `CA_CERTIFICATE` is loaded but never consulted (dead code). Requires MITM between arnika and the KMS endpoint, which in typical deployments are co-located.\n**Fix**: remove the flag; `RootCAs` already holds the correct pool when `CA_CERTIFICATE` is configured.\n\n### PoC\nSee [arnika_exploit.tar.gz](https://github.com/user-attachments/files/27585454/arnika_exploit.tar.gz). PoC shows observable behavior for each attack; the third one (KMS MITM) needs no custom code, any HTTPS proxy with a self-signed cert is enough.\n\n### Impact\nIssues require network MITM or local directory write access to exploit. No direct key extraction or code execution. Primary impact is tunnel desync and silent security downgrade in hybrid QKD+PQC mode.",
  "id": "GHSA-rc6v-5rmx-w5mv",
  "modified": "2026-06-09T10:34:05Z",
  "published": "2026-05-15T18:13:57Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/arnika-project/arnika/security/advisories/GHSA-rc6v-5rmx-w5mv"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/arnika-project/arnika/commit/efbd980d8b636cb59f60f2d6ece1b80a9cf36535"
    },
    {
      "type": "PACKAGE",
      "url": "https://github.com/arnika-project/arnika"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/arnika-project/arnika/releases/tag/v1.0.1"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    },
    {
      "score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V4"
    }
  ],
  "summary": "arnika is affected by medium-severity issues in UDP rotation, PQC handling, and KMS TLS"
}

GHSA-RJM3-978X-473M

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-13 01:16 – Updated: 2022-05-13 01:16
VLAI
Details

SAGA1-L8B with any firmware versions prior to A0.10 are vulnerable to a replay attack and command forgery.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2018-17903"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-294"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2018-10-24T22:29:00Z",
    "severity": "CRITICAL"
  },
  "details": "SAGA1-L8B with any firmware versions prior to A0.10 are vulnerable to a replay attack and command forgery.",
  "id": "GHSA-rjm3-978x-473m",
  "modified": "2022-05-13T01:16:09Z",
  "published": "2022-05-13T01:16:09Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-17903"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://ics-cert.us-cert.gov/advisories/ICSA-18-296-02"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/105729"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

GHSA-RP7W-4XXF-CQ5W

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:03 – Updated: 2026-06-02 21:30
VLAI
Details

In Omron PLC CJ series, all versions, and Omron PLC CS series, all versions, an attacker could monitor traffic between the PLC and the controller and replay requests that could result in the opening and closing of industrial valves.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2019-13533"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-294"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2019-12-16T20:15:00Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "In Omron PLC CJ series, all versions, and Omron PLC CS series, all versions, an attacker could monitor traffic between the PLC and the controller and replay requests that could result in the opening and closing of industrial valves.",
  "id": "GHSA-rp7w-4xxf-cq5w",
  "modified": "2026-06-02T21:30:30Z",
  "published": "2022-05-24T17:03:42Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-13533"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://www.us-cert.gov/ics/advisories/icsa-19-346-02"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:H",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}

Mitigation
Architecture and Design

Utilize some sequence or time stamping functionality along with a checksum which takes this into account in order to ensure that messages can be parsed only once.

Mitigation
Architecture and Design

Since any attacker who can listen to traffic can see sequence numbers, it is necessary to sign messages with some kind of cryptography to ensure that sequence numbers are not simply doctored along with content.

CAPEC-102: Session Sidejacking

Session sidejacking takes advantage of an unencrypted communication channel between a victim and target system. The attacker sniffs traffic on a network looking for session tokens in unencrypted traffic. Once a session token is captured, the attacker performs malicious actions by using the stolen token with the targeted application to impersonate the victim. This attack is a specific method of session hijacking, which is exploiting a valid session token to gain unauthorized access to a target system or information. Other methods to perform a session hijacking are session fixation, cross-site scripting, or compromising a user or server machine and stealing the session token.

CAPEC-509: Kerberoasting

Through the exploitation of how service accounts leverage Kerberos authentication with Service Principal Names (SPNs), the adversary obtains and subsequently cracks the hashed credentials of a service account target to exploit its privileges. The Kerberos authentication protocol centers around a ticketing system which is used to request/grant access to services and to then access the requested services. As an authenticated user, the adversary may request Active Directory and obtain a service ticket with portions encrypted via RC4 with the private key of the authenticated account. By extracting the local ticket and saving it disk, the adversary can brute force the hashed value to reveal the target account credentials.

CAPEC-555: Remote Services with Stolen Credentials

This pattern of attack involves an adversary that uses stolen credentials to leverage remote services such as RDP, telnet, SSH, and VNC to log into a system. Once access is gained, any number of malicious activities could be performed.

CAPEC-561: Windows Admin Shares with Stolen Credentials

An adversary guesses or obtains (i.e. steals or purchases) legitimate Windows administrator credentials (e.g. userID/password) to access Windows Admin Shares on a local machine or within a Windows domain.

CAPEC-60: Reusing Session IDs (aka Session Replay)

This attack targets the reuse of valid session ID to spoof the target system in order to gain privileges. The attacker tries to reuse a stolen session ID used previously during a transaction to perform spoofing and session hijacking. Another name for this type of attack is Session Replay.

CAPEC-644: Use of Captured Hashes (Pass The Hash)

An adversary obtains (i.e. steals or purchases) legitimate Windows domain credential hash values to access systems within the domain that leverage the Lan Man (LM) and/or NT Lan Man (NTLM) authentication protocols.

CAPEC-645: Use of Captured Tickets (Pass The Ticket)

An adversary uses stolen Kerberos tickets to access systems/resources that leverage the Kerberos authentication protocol. The Kerberos authentication protocol centers around a ticketing system which is used to request/grant access to services and to then access the requested services. An adversary can obtain any one of these tickets (e.g. Service Ticket, Ticket Granting Ticket, Silver Ticket, or Golden Ticket) to authenticate to a system/resource without needing the account's credentials. Depending on the ticket obtained, the adversary may be able to access a particular resource or generate TGTs for any account within an Active Directory Domain.

CAPEC-652: Use of Known Kerberos Credentials

An adversary obtains (i.e. steals or purchases) legitimate Kerberos credentials (e.g. Kerberos service account userID/password or Kerberos Tickets) with the goal of achieving authenticated access to additional systems, applications, or services within the domain.

CAPEC-701: Browser in the Middle (BiTM)

An adversary exploits the inherent functionalities of a web browser, in order to establish an unnoticed remote desktop connection in the victim's browser to the adversary's system. The adversary must deploy a web client with a remote desktop session that the victim can access.

CAPEC-94: Adversary in the Middle (AiTM)

An adversary targets the communication between two components (typically client and server), in order to alter or obtain data from transactions. A general approach entails the adversary placing themself within the communication channel between the two components.