chore(findings): anchore/enterprise/enterprise
Summary
anchore/enterprise/enterprise has 140 new findings discovered during continuous monitoring.
id | source | severity | package |
---|---|---|---|
CVE-2023-2953 | Anchore CVE | Low | openldap-2.6.6-3.el9 |
CVE-2024-0450 | Anchore CVE | Medium | python-unversioned-command-3.9.18-3.el9 |
CVE-2024-33601 | Anchore CVE | Low | glibc-common-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-33599 | Anchore CVE | High | glibc-langpack-en-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-33601 | Anchore CVE | Low | glibc-langpack-en-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-2398 | Anchore CVE | Medium | libcurl-minimal-7.76.1-29.el9_4 |
CVE-2024-2511 | Anchore CVE | Low | openssl-1:3.0.7-27.el9 |
CVE-2024-0450 | Anchore CVE | Medium | python3-libs-3.9.18-3.el9 |
CVE-2024-33600 | Anchore CVE | Medium | glibc-langpack-en-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2022-0391 | Anchore CVE | Medium | python3-3.9.18-3.el9 |
CVE-2023-6597 | Anchore CVE | High | python3.11-libs-3.11.7-1.el9 |
CVE-2023-6597 | Anchore CVE | High | python3-libs-3.9.18-3.el9 |
CVE-2024-2961 | Anchore CVE | High | glibc-common-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-33599 | Anchore CVE | High | glibc-minimal-langpack-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-2961 | Anchore CVE | High | glibc-langpack-en-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2021-3997 | Anchore CVE | Medium | systemd-libs-252-32.el9_4 |
CVE-2021-23336 | Anchore CVE | Medium | python-unversioned-command-3.9.18-3.el9 |
CVE-2024-33599 | Anchore CVE | High | glibc-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2023-6597 | Anchore CVE | High | python3-3.9.18-3.el9 |
CVE-2022-0391 | Anchore CVE | Medium | python3-libs-3.9.18-3.el9 |
CVE-2024-33599 | Anchore CVE | High | glibc-common-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-33601 | Anchore CVE | Low | glibc-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2022-0391 | Anchore CVE | Medium | python-unversioned-command-3.9.18-3.el9 |
CVE-2023-6597 | Anchore CVE | High | python-unversioned-command-3.9.18-3.el9 |
CVE-2021-3572 | Anchore CVE | Low | python3-pip-wheel-21.2.3-8.el9 |
GHSA-x84c-p2g9-rqv9 | Anchore CVE | Medium | github.com/docker/docker-v26.0.0+incompatible |
CVE-2024-32487 | Anchore CVE | High | less-590-3.el9_3 |
CVE-2024-0450 | Anchore CVE | Medium | python3.11-libs-3.11.7-1.el9 |
CVE-2024-33602 | Anchore CVE | Low | glibc-minimal-langpack-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-33600 | Anchore CVE | Medium | glibc-minimal-langpack-2.34-100.el9 |
GHSA-x84c-p2g9-rqv9 | Anchore CVE | Medium | github.com/docker/docker-v26.0.0+incompatible |
CVE-2024-0450 | Anchore CVE | Medium | python3-3.9.18-3.el9 |
CVE-2024-2961 | Anchore CVE | High | glibc-2.34-100.el9 |
GHSA-x84c-p2g9-rqv9 | Anchore CVE | Medium | github.com/docker/docker-v26.0.1+incompatible |
CVE-2024-33600 | Anchore CVE | Medium | glibc-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-0450 | Anchore CVE | Medium | python3.11-3.11.7-1.el9 |
CVE-2024-2511 | Anchore CVE | Low | openssl-libs-1:3.0.7-27.el9 |
CVE-2021-23336 | Anchore CVE | Medium | python3-libs-3.9.18-3.el9 |
CVE-2024-2398 | Anchore CVE | Medium | curl-minimal-7.76.1-29.el9_4 |
CVE-2024-33602 | Anchore CVE | Low | glibc-common-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-33600 | Anchore CVE | Medium | glibc-common-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-33602 | Anchore CVE | Low | glibc-langpack-en-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-2961 | Anchore CVE | High | glibc-minimal-langpack-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-28180 | Anchore CVE | Medium | skopeo-2:1.14.3-2.el9_4 |
CVE-2021-23336 | Anchore CVE | Medium | python3-3.9.18-3.el9 |
CVE-2023-6597 | Anchore CVE | High | python3.11-3.11.7-1.el9 |
GHSA-x84c-p2g9-rqv9 | Anchore CVE | Medium | github.com/docker/docker-v26.0.1+incompatible |
CVE-2024-33602 | Anchore CVE | Low | glibc-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-1394 | Anchore CVE | High | skopeo-2:1.14.3-2.el9_4 |
CVE-2024-33601 | Anchore CVE | Low | glibc-minimal-langpack-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2022-30632 | Anchore CVE | Medium | skopeo-2:1.14.3-2.el9_4 |
CVE-2023-30571 | Anchore CVE | Medium | libarchive-3.5.3-4.el9 |
CVE-2022-29458 | Anchore CVE | Low | ncurses-6.2-10.20210508.el9 |
CVE-2022-29458 | Anchore CVE | Low | ncurses-libs-6.2-10.20210508.el9 |
CVE-2022-27943 | Anchore CVE | Low | libstdc++-11.4.1-3.el9 |
CVE-2023-36632 | Anchore CVE | Medium | python-unversioned-command-3.9.18-3.el9 |
CVE-2024-0232 | Anchore CVE | Low | sqlite-libs-3.34.1-7.el9_3 |
CVE-2022-2879 | Anchore CVE | Medium | skopeo-2:1.14.3-2.el9_4 |
CVE-2023-36632 | Anchore CVE | Medium | python3.11-libs-3.11.7-1.el9 |
CVE-2022-41715 | Anchore CVE | Medium | skopeo-2:1.14.3-2.el9_4 |
CVE-2022-1705 | Anchore CVE | Medium | skopeo-2:1.14.3-2.el9_4 |
CVE-2022-30630 | Anchore CVE | Medium | skopeo-2:1.14.3-2.el9_4 |
CVE-2005-2541 | Anchore CVE | Medium | tar-2:1.34-6.el9_1 |
CVE-2022-2880 | Anchore CVE | Medium | skopeo-2:1.14.3-2.el9_4 |
CVE-2022-27943 | Anchore CVE | Low | libgcc-11.4.1-3.el9 |
CVE-2022-32189 | Anchore CVE | Low | skopeo-2:1.14.3-2.el9_4 |
CVE-2022-3219 | Anchore CVE | Low | gnupg2-2.3.3-4.el9 |
CVE-2022-41409 | Anchore CVE | Low | pcre2-10.40-5.el9 |
CVE-2022-41409 | Anchore CVE | Low | pcre2-syntax-10.40-5.el9 |
CVE-2022-1962 | Anchore CVE | Medium | skopeo-2:1.14.3-2.el9_4 |
CVE-2023-36632 | Anchore CVE | Medium | python3-libs-3.9.18-3.el9 |
CVE-2023-39804 | Anchore CVE | Low | tar-2:1.34-6.el9_1 |
CVE-2023-36632 | Anchore CVE | Medium | python3.11-3.11.7-1.el9 |
CVE-2022-32148 | Anchore CVE | Medium | skopeo-2:1.14.3-2.el9_4 |
CVE-2022-4899 | Anchore CVE | Low | libzstd-1.5.1-2.el9 |
CVE-2023-36632 | Anchore CVE | Medium | python3-3.9.18-3.el9 |
CVE-2023-36191 | Anchore CVE | Low | sqlite-libs-3.34.1-7.el9_3 |
CVE-2022-27664 | Anchore CVE | Medium | skopeo-2:1.14.3-2.el9_4 |
CVE-2022-29458 | Anchore CVE | Low | ncurses-base-6.2-10.20210508.el9 |
CVE-2023-4156 | Anchore CVE | Low | gawk-5.1.0-6.el9 |
CVE-2024-25062 | Anchore CVE | Medium | libxml2-2.9.13-6.el9_4 |
CVE-2023-45322 | Anchore CVE | Low | libxml2-2.9.13-6.el9_4 |
CVE-2024-2961 | Twistlock CVE | Critical | glibc-langpack-en-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-2961 | Twistlock CVE | Critical | glibc-common-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-2961 | Twistlock CVE | Critical | glibc-minimal-langpack-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-2961 | Twistlock CVE | Critical | glibc-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-32487 | Twistlock CVE | Critical | less-590-3.el9_3 |
CVE-2023-6597 | Twistlock CVE | Critical | python3.11-libs-3.11.7-1.el9 |
CVE-2023-6597 | Twistlock CVE | Critical | python3-libs-3.9.18-3.el9 |
CVE-2023-6597 | Twistlock CVE | Critical | python3-3.9.18-3.el9 |
CVE-2023-6597 | Twistlock CVE | Critical | python3.11-3.11.7-1.el9 |
CVE-2023-6597 | Twistlock CVE | Critical | python-unversioned-command-3.9.18-3.el9 |
CVE-2024-33599 | Twistlock CVE | Critical | glibc-langpack-en-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-33599 | Twistlock CVE | Critical | glibc-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-33599 | Twistlock CVE | Critical | glibc-minimal-langpack-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-33599 | Twistlock CVE | Critical | glibc-common-2.34-100.el9 |
GHSA-c5pj-mqfh-rvc3 | Twistlock CVE | High | github.com/opencontainers/runc-v1.1.12 |
CVE-2024-2398 | Twistlock CVE | Medium | curl-minimal-7.76.1-29.el9_4 |
CVE-2024-2398 | Twistlock CVE | Medium | libcurl-minimal-7.76.1-29.el9_4 |
CVE-2024-0450 | Twistlock CVE | Medium | python3.11-3.11.7-1.el9 |
CVE-2024-0450 | Twistlock CVE | Medium | python3-3.9.18-3.el9 |
CVE-2024-0450 | Twistlock CVE | Medium | python-unversioned-command-3.9.18-3.el9 |
CVE-2024-0450 | Twistlock CVE | Medium | python3.11-libs-3.11.7-1.el9 |
CVE-2024-0450 | Twistlock CVE | Medium | python3-libs-3.9.18-3.el9 |
CVE-2021-23336 | Twistlock CVE | Medium | python3-libs-3.9.18-3.el9 |
CVE-2021-23336 | Twistlock CVE | Medium | python-unversioned-command-3.9.18-3.el9 |
CVE-2021-23336 | Twistlock CVE | Medium | python3-3.9.18-3.el9 |
CVE-2021-3997 | Twistlock CVE | Medium | systemd-pam-252-32.el9_4 |
CVE-2021-3997 | Twistlock CVE | Medium | systemd-libs-252-32.el9_4 |
CVE-2021-3997 | Twistlock CVE | Medium | systemd-rpm-macros-252-32.el9_4 |
CVE-2021-3997 | Twistlock CVE | Medium | systemd-252-32.el9_4 |
CVE-2024-33600 | Twistlock CVE | Medium | glibc-langpack-en-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-33600 | Twistlock CVE | Medium | glibc-common-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-33600 | Twistlock CVE | Medium | glibc-minimal-langpack-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-33600 | Twistlock CVE | Medium | glibc-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2022-0391 | Twistlock CVE | Medium | python-unversioned-command-3.9.18-3.el9 |
CVE-2022-0391 | Twistlock CVE | Medium | python3-3.9.18-3.el9 |
CVE-2022-0391 | Twistlock CVE | Medium | python3-libs-3.9.18-3.el9 |
CVE-2024-32473 | Twistlock CVE | Medium | github.com/docker/docker-v26.0.1 |
CVE-2024-32473 | Twistlock CVE | Medium | github.com/docker/docker-v26.0.0 |
CVE-2023-45803 | Twistlock CVE | Medium | python3-pip-wheel-21.2.3-8.el9 |
CVE-2023-2953 | Twistlock CVE | Low | openldap-2.6.6-3.el9 |
CVE-2022-27943 | Twistlock CVE | Low | libgcc-11.4.1-3.el9 |
CVE-2022-27943 | Twistlock CVE | Low | libstdc++-11.4.1-3.el9 |
CVE-2022-41409 | Twistlock CVE | Low | pcre2-syntax-10.40-5.el9 |
CVE-2022-41409 | Twistlock CVE | Low | pcre2-10.40-5.el9 |
CVE-2021-3572 | Twistlock CVE | Low | python3-pip-wheel-21.2.3-8.el9 |
CVE-2024-33602 | Twistlock CVE | Low | glibc-common-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-33602 | Twistlock CVE | Low | glibc-minimal-langpack-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-33602 | Twistlock CVE | Low | glibc-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-33602 | Twistlock CVE | Low | glibc-langpack-en-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-33601 | Twistlock CVE | Low | glibc-langpack-en-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-33601 | Twistlock CVE | Low | glibc-common-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-33601 | Twistlock CVE | Low | glibc-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-33601 | Twistlock CVE | Low | glibc-minimal-langpack-2.34-100.el9 |
CVE-2024-2511 | Twistlock CVE | Low | openssl-3.0.7-27.el9 |
CVE-2024-2511 | Twistlock CVE | Low | openssl-libs-3.0.7-27.el9 |
CVE-2024-25062 | Twistlock CVE | Medium | libxml2-2.9.13-6.el9_4 |
CVE-2024-34069 | Twistlock CVE | High | werkzeug-3.0.2 |
CVE-2024-34064 | Twistlock CVE | Medium | jinja2-3.1.3 |
VAT: https://vat.dso.mil/vat/image?imageName=anchore/enterprise/enterprise&tag=5.5.0&branch=master
More information can be found in the VAT located here: https://vat.dso.mil/vat/image?imageName=anchore/enterprise/enterprise&tag=5.4.0&branch=master
Tasks
Contributor:
-
Provide justifications for findings in the VAT (docs) -
Apply the StatusVerification label to this issue and wait for feedback
Iron Bank:
-
Review findings and justifications
Note: If the above process is rejected for any reason, the
Verification
label will be removed and the issue will be sent back toOpen
. Any comments will be listed in this issue for you to address. Once they have been addressed, you must re-add theVerification
label.
Questions?
Contact the Iron Bank team by commenting on this issue with your questions or concerns. If you do not receive a response, add /cc @ironbank-notifications/onboarding
.
Additionally, Iron Bank hosts an AMA working session every Wednesday from 1630-1730EST to answer questions.