fkie_cve-2010-2224
Vulnerability from fkie_nvd
Published
2010-06-24 17:30
Modified
2025-04-11 00:51
Severity ?
Summary
The snapshot merging functionality in Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization Manager (aka RHEV-M) before 2.2 does not properly pass the postzero parameter during operations on deleted volumes, which allows guest OS users to obtain sensitive information by examining the disk blocks associated with a deleted virtual machine.
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
redhat enterprise_virtualization_manager *



{
  "configurations": [
    {
      "nodes": [
        {
          "cpeMatch": [
            {
              "criteria": "cpe:2.3:o:redhat:enterprise_virtualization_manager:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
              "matchCriteriaId": "67A87F71-7C9C-428E-8B8A-E003466D6CBA",
              "versionEndIncluding": "2.1",
              "vulnerable": true
            }
          ],
          "negate": false,
          "operator": "OR"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "cveTags": [],
  "descriptions": [
    {
      "lang": "en",
      "value": "The snapshot merging functionality in Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization Manager (aka RHEV-M) before 2.2 does not properly pass the postzero parameter during operations on deleted volumes, which allows guest OS users to obtain sensitive information by examining the disk blocks associated with a deleted virtual machine."
    },
    {
      "lang": "es",
      "value": "La funcionalidad snapshot merging en Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization Manager (conocido como RHEV-M) anterior v2.2 no pasa adecuadamente el par\u00e1metro prostzero durante las operaciones en el borrado de vol\u00famenes, lo que permite a usarios invitados OS obtener informaci\u00f3n sensible por examinaci\u00f3n de los bloques de discos asociados con una maquina virtual borrada. \r\n"
    }
  ],
  "id": "CVE-2010-2224",
  "lastModified": "2025-04-11T00:51:21.963",
  "metrics": {
    "cvssMetricV2": [
      {
        "acInsufInfo": false,
        "baseSeverity": "LOW",
        "cvssData": {
          "accessComplexity": "LOW",
          "accessVector": "LOCAL",
          "authentication": "NONE",
          "availabilityImpact": "NONE",
          "baseScore": 2.1,
          "confidentialityImpact": "PARTIAL",
          "integrityImpact": "NONE",
          "vectorString": "AV:L/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N",
          "version": "2.0"
        },
        "exploitabilityScore": 3.9,
        "impactScore": 2.9,
        "obtainAllPrivilege": false,
        "obtainOtherPrivilege": false,
        "obtainUserPrivilege": false,
        "source": "nvd@nist.gov",
        "type": "Primary",
        "userInteractionRequired": false
      }
    ]
  },
  "published": "2010-06-24T17:30:00.967",
  "references": [
    {
      "source": "secalert@redhat.com",
      "url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/41045"
    },
    {
      "source": "secalert@redhat.com",
      "url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=606774"
    },
    {
      "source": "secalert@redhat.com",
      "tags": [
        "Patch",
        "Vendor Advisory"
      ],
      "url": "https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2010-0478.html"
    },
    {
      "source": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
      "url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/41045"
    },
    {
      "source": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
      "url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=606774"
    },
    {
      "source": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
      "tags": [
        "Patch",
        "Vendor Advisory"
      ],
      "url": "https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2010-0478.html"
    }
  ],
  "sourceIdentifier": "secalert@redhat.com",
  "vulnStatus": "Deferred",
  "weaknesses": [
    {
      "description": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "CWE-264"
        }
      ],
      "source": "nvd@nist.gov",
      "type": "Primary"
    }
  ]
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Sightings

Author Source Type Date

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
  • Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.


Loading…

Loading…