alirezaaminzadeh/secembed-pairs huggingface dataset:
Query: vulnerability: modules/chef.py in SaltStack before 2014.7.4 does not properly handle files in /tmp.
Matching passage: CVE-2015-1839. CWE: CWE-19. CVSS: 5.300000190734863. modules/chef.py in SaltStack before 2014.7.4 does not properly handle files in /tmp.
Near-miss passage: CVE-2015-2285. CWE: CWE-19. CVSS: 7.199999809265137. The logrotation script (/etc/cron.daily/upstart) in the Ubuntu Upstart package before 1.13.2-0ubuntu9, as used in Ubuntu Vivid 15.04, allows local users to execute arbitrary commands and gain privileges via a crafted file in /run/user/*/upstart/sessions/.
Query: describe CVE-2015-1914
Matching passage: CVE-2015-1914. CWE: CWE-200. CVSS: 5.0. IBM Java 7 R1 before SR3, 7 before SR9, 6 R1 before SR8 FP4, 6 before SR16 FP4, and 5.0 before SR16 FP10 allows remote attackers to bypass "permission checks" and obtain sensitive information via vectors related to the Java Virtual Machine.
Near-miss passage: CVE-2015-3340. CWE: CWE-200. CVSS: 2.9000000953674316. Xen 4.2.x through 4.5.x does not initialize certain fields, which allows certain remote service domains to obtain sensitive information from memory via a (1) XEN_DOMCTL_gettscinfo or (2) XEN_SYSCTL_getdomaininfolist request.
Query: exploit The dzs-zoomsounds plugin through 2.0 for WordPress has admin/upload.php arbitrary file upload.
Matching passage: CVE-2015-9471. CWE: CWE-434. CVSS: 9.800000190734863. The dzs-zoomsounds plugin through 2.0 for WordPress has admin/upload.php arbitrary file upload.
Near-miss passage: CVE-2015-1000000. CWE: CWE-434. CVSS: 9.800000190734863. Remote file upload vulnerability in mailcwp v1.99 wordpress plugin
Query: secure coding against J2EE Misconfiguration: Missing Custom Error Page
Matching passage: CWE-7 J2EE Misconfiguration: Missing Custom Error Page. The default error page of a web application should not display sensitive information about the product.
Near-miss passage: CWE-584 Return Inside Finally Block. The code has a return statement inside a finally block, which will cause any thrown exception in the try block to be discarded.
Query: common weakness: Function Call With Incorrect Order of Arguments
Matching passage: CWE-683 Function Call With Incorrect Order of Arguments. The product calls a function, procedure, or routine, but the caller specifies the arguments in an incorrect order, leading to resultant weaknesses.
Near-miss passage: CWE-1426 Improper Validation of Generative AI Output. The product invokes a generative AI/ML component whose behaviors and outputs cannot be directly controlled, but the product does not validate or insufficiently validates the outputs to ensure that they align with the intended security, content, or privacy policy.
Query: indicators of Command Obfuscation
Matching passage: T1027.010 Command Obfuscation. Tactics: stealth. Description: Adversaries may obfuscate content during command execution to impede detection. Command-line obfuscation is a method of making strings and patterns within commands and scripts more difficult to signature and analyze. This type of obfuscation can be included within commands executed by delivered payloads (e.g., [Phishing](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1566) and [Drive-by Compromise](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1189)) or interactively via [Command and Scripting Interpreter](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1059).(Citation: Akamai JS)(Citation: Malware Monday VBE) For example, adversaries may abuse syntax that utilizes various symbols and escape characters (such as spacing, `^`, `+`. `$`, and `%`) to make commands difficult to analyze while maintaining the same intended functionality.(Citation: RC PowerShell) Many languages support built-in obfuscation in the form of base64 or URL encoding.(Citation: Microsoft PowerShellB64) Adversaries may also manually implement command obfuscation via string splitting (`“Wor”+“d.Application”`), order and casing of characters (`rev <<<'dwssap/cte/ tac'`), globing (`mkdir -p '/tmp/:&$NiA'`), as well as various tricks involving passing strings through tokens/environment variables/input streams.(Citation: Bashfuscator Command Obfuscators)(Citation: FireEye Obfuscation June 2017) Adversaries may also use tricks such as directory traversals to obfuscate references to the binary being invoked by a command (`C:\voi\pcw\..\..\Windows\tei\qs\k\..\..\..\system32\erool\..\wbem\wg\je\..\..\wmic.exe shadowcopy delete`).(Citation: Twitter Richard WMIC) Tools such as <code>Invoke-Obfuscation</code> and <code>Invoke-DOSfucation</code> have also been used to obfuscate commands.(Citation: Invoke-DOSfuscation)(Citation: Invoke-Obfuscation)
Near-miss passage: T1027.002 Software Packing. Tactics: stealth. Description: Adversaries may perform software packing or virtual machine software protection to conceal their code. Software packing is a method of compressing or encrypting an executable. Packing an executable changes the file signature in an attempt to avoid signature-based detection. Most decompression techniques decompress the executable code in memory. Virtual machine software protection translates an executable's original code into a special format that only a special virtual machine can run. A virtual machine is then called to run this code.(Citation: ESET FinFisher Jan 2018) Utilities used to perform software packing are called packers. Example packers are MPRESS and UPX. A more comprehensive list of known packers is available, but adversaries may create their own packing techniques that do not leave the same artifacts as well-known packers to evade defenses.(Citation: Awesome Executable Packing)
Query: patch priority for CVE-2015-0404
Matching passage: CVE-2015-0404. CWE: UNKNOWN. CVSS: 4.300000190734863. Unspecified vulnerability in the Oracle Applications Framework component in Oracle E-Business Suite 11.5.10.2, 12.0.6, 12.1.3, 12.2.2, 12.2.3, and 12.2.4 allows remote attackers to affect integrity via unknown vectors related to Error Messages.
Near-miss passage: CVE-2015-8057. CWE: UNKNOWN. CVSS: 10.0. Use-after-free vulnerability in Adobe Flash Player before 18.0.0.268 and 19.x and 20.x before 20.0.0.228 on Windows and OS X and before 11.2.202.554 on Linux, Adobe AIR before 20.0.0.204, Adobe AIR SDK before 20.0.0.204, and Adobe AIR SDK & Compiler before 20.0.0.204 allows attackers to execute arbitrary code via unspecified vectors, a different vulnerability than CVE-2015-8048, CVE-2015-8049, CVE-2015-8050, CVE-2015-8055, CVE-2015-8056, CVE-2015-8058, CVE-2015-8059, CVE-2015-8061, CVE-2015-8062, CVE-2015-8063, CVE-2015-8064, CVE-2015-8065, CVE-2015-8066, CVE-2015-8067, CVE-2015-8068, CVE-2015-8069, CVE-2015-8070, CVE-2015-8071, CVE-2015-8401, CVE-2015-8402, CVE-2015-8403, CVE-2015-8404, CVE-2015-8405, CVE-2015-8406, CVE-2015-8410, CVE-2015-8411, CVE-2015-8412, CVE-2015-8413, CVE-2015-8414, CVE-2015-8420, CVE-2015-8421, CVE-2015-8422, CVE-2015-8423, CVE-2015-8424, CVE-2015-8425, CVE-2015-8426, CVE-2015-8427, CVE-2015-8428, CVE-2015-8429, CVE-2015-8430, CVE-2015-8431, CVE-2015-8432, CVE-2015-8433, CVE-2015-8434, CVE-2015-8435, CVE-2015-8436, CVE-2015-8437, CVE-2015-8441, CVE-2015-8442, CVE-2015-8447, CVE-2015-8448, CVE-2015-8449, CVE-2015-8450, CVE-2015-8452, and CVE-2015-8454.
Query: mitigate Network Sniffing
Matching passage: T1040 Network Sniffing. Tactics: credential access, discovery. Description: Adversaries may passively sniff network traffic to capture information about an environment, including authentication material passed over the network. Network sniffing refers to using the network interface on a system to monitor or capture information sent over a wired or wireless connection. An adversary may place a network interface into promiscuous mode to passively access data in transit over the network, or use span ports to capture a larger amount of data. Data captured via this technique may include user credentials, especially those sent over an insecure, unencrypted protocol. Techniques for name service resolution poisoning, such as [Name Resolution Poisoning and SMB Relay](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1557/001), can also be used to capture credentials to websites, proxies, and internal systems by redirecting traffic to an adversary. Network sniffing may reveal configuration details, such as running services, version numbers, and other network characteristics (e.g. IP addresses, hostnames, VLAN IDs) necessary for subsequent [Lateral Movement](https://attack.mitre.org/tactics/TA0008) and/or [Stealth](https://attack.mitre.org/tactics/TA0005) activities. Adversaries may likely also utilize network sniffing during [Adversary-in-the-Middle](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1557) (AiTM) to passively gain additional knowledge about the environment. In cloud-based environments, adversaries may still be able to use traffic mirroring services to sniff network traffic from virtual machines. For example, AWS Traffic Mirroring, GCP Packet Mirroring, and Azure vTap allow users to define specified instances to collect traffic from and specified targets to send collected traffic to.(Citation: AWS Traffic Mirroring)(Citation: GCP Packet Mirroring)(Citation: Azure Virtual Network TAP) Often, much of this traffic will be in cleartext due to the use of TLS termination at the load balancer level to reduce the strain of encrypting and decrypting traffic.(Citation: R
Near-miss passage: T1007 System Service Discovery. Tactics: discovery. Description: Adversaries may try to gather information about registered local system services. Adversaries may obtain information about services using tools as well as OS utility commands such as <code>sc query</code>, <code>tasklist /svc</code>, <code>systemctl --type=service</code>, and <code>net start</code>. Adversaries may also gather information about schedule tasks via commands such as `schtasks` on Windows or `crontab -l` on Linux and macOS.(Citation: Elastic Security Labs GOSAR 2024)(Citation: SentinelLabs macOS Malware 2021)(Citation: Splunk Linux Gormir 2024)(Citation: Aquasec Kinsing 2020) Adversaries may use the information from [System Service Discovery](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1007) during automated discovery to shape follow-on behaviors, including whether or not the adversary fully infects the target and/or attempts specific actions.
Query: patch priority for CVE-2015-2727
Matching passage: CVE-2015-2727. CWE: CWE-20. CVSS: 6.800000190734863. Mozilla Firefox 38.0 and Firefox ESR 38.0 allow user-assisted remote attackers to read arbitrary files or execute arbitrary JavaScript code with chrome privileges via a crafted web site that is accessed with unspecified mouse and keyboard actions. NOTE: this vulnerability exists because of a CVE-2015-0821 regression.
Near-miss passage: CVE-2015-6407. CWE: CWE-20. CVSS: 4.0. Cisco Emergency Responder 10.5(3.10000.9) allows remote attackers to upload files to arbitrary locations via a crafted parameter, aka Bug ID CSCuv25501.
Query: risk of Mozilla Firefox before 36.0 does not properly recognize the equivalence of domain names with and without a trailing . (dot) character, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to b
Matching passage: CVE-2015-0832. CWE: CWE-254. CVSS: 5.0. Mozilla Firefox before 36.0 does not properly recognize the equivalence of domain names with and without a trailing . (dot) character, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to bypass the HPKP and HSTS protection mechanisms by constructing a URL with this character and leveraging access to an X.509 certificate for a domain with this character.
Near-miss passage: CVE-2015-5943. CWE: CWE-254. CVSS: 4.300000190734863. SecurityAgent in Apple OS X before 10.11.1 does not prevent synthetic clicks from reaching keychain windows, which allows attackers to bypass intended access restrictions via a crafted app.
Query: patch priority for CVE-2015-8345
Matching passage: CVE-2015-8345. CWE: CWE-399. CVSS: 6.5. The eepro100 emulator in QEMU qemu-kvm blank allows local guest users to cause a denial of service (application crash and infinite loop) via vectors involving the command block list.
Near-miss passage: CVE-2015-1558. CWE: CWE-399. CVSS: 3.5. Asterisk Open Source 12.x before 12.8.1 and 13.x before 13.1.1, when using the PJSIP channel driver, does not properly reclaim RTP ports, which allows remote authenticated users to cause a denial of service (file descriptor consumption) via an SDP offer containing only incompatible codecs.
Query: EDR alert: possible Exploits (T1587.004)
Matching passage: T1587.004 Exploits. Tactics: resource development. Description: Adversaries may develop exploits that can be used during targeting. An exploit takes advantage of a bug or vulnerability in order to cause unintended or unanticipated behavior to occur on computer hardware or software. Rather than finding/modifying exploits from online or purchasing them from exploit vendors, an adversary may develop their own exploits.(Citation: NYTStuxnet) Adversaries may use information acquired via [Vulnerabilities](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1588/006) to focus exploit development efforts. As part of the exploit development process, adversaries may uncover exploitable vulnerabilities through methods such as fuzzing and patch analysis.(Citation: Irongeek Sims BSides 2017) As with legitimate development efforts, different skill sets may be required for developing exploits. The skills needed may be located in-house, or may need to be contracted out. Use of a contractor may be considered an extension of that adversary's exploit development capabilities, provided the adversary plays a role in shaping requirements and maintains an initial degree of exclusivity to the exploit. Adversaries may use exploits during various phases of the adversary lifecycle (i.e. [Exploit Public-Facing Application](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1190), [Exploitation for Client Execution](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1203), [Exploitation for Privilege Escalation](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1068), [Exploitation for Stealth](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1211), [Exploitation for Credential Access](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1212), [Exploitation of Remote Services](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1210), and [Application or System Exploitation](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1499/004)).
Near-miss passage: T1587.002 Code Signing Certificates. Tactics: resource development. Description: Adversaries may create self-signed code signing certificates that can be used during targeting. Code signing is the process of digitally signing executables and scripts to confirm the software author and guarantee that the code has not been altered or corrupted. Code signing provides a level of authenticity for a program from the developer and a guarantee that the program has not been tampered with.(Citation: Wikipedia Code Signing) Users and/or security tools may trust a signed piece of code more than an unsigned piece of code even if they don't know who issued the certificate or who the author is. Prior to [Code Signing](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1553/002), adversaries may develop self-signed code signing certificates for use in operations.
Query: Persistence mechanism resembling Purchase Technical Data
Matching passage: T1597.002 Purchase Technical Data. Tactics: reconnaissance. Description: Adversaries may purchase technical information about victims that can be used during targeting. Information about victims may be available for purchase within reputable private sources and databases, such as paid subscriptions to feeds of scan databases or other data aggregation services. Adversaries may also purchase information from less-reputable sources such as dark web or cybercrime blackmarkets. Adversaries may purchase information about their already identified targets, or use purchased data to discover opportunities for successful breaches. Threat actors may gather various technical details from purchased data, including but not limited to employee contact information, credentials, or specifics regarding a victim’s infrastructure.(Citation: ZDNET Selling Data) Information from these sources may reveal opportunities for other forms of reconnaissance (ex: [Phishing for Information](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1598) or [Search Open Websites/Domains](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1593)), establishing operational resources (ex: [Develop Capabilities](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1587) or [Obtain Capabilities](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1588)), and/or initial access (ex: [External Remote Services](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1133) or [Valid Accounts](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1078)).
Near-miss passage: T1597 Search Closed Sources. Tactics: reconnaissance. Description: Adversaries may search and gather information about victims from closed (e.g., paid, private, or otherwise not freely available) sources that can be used during targeting. Information about victims may be available for purchase from reputable private sources and databases, such as paid subscriptions to feeds of technical/threat intelligence data. Adversaries may also purchase information from less-reputable sources such as dark web or cybercrime blackmarkets.(Citation: ZDNET Selling Data) Adversaries may search in different closed databases depending on what information they seek to gather. Information from these sources may reveal opportunities for other forms of reconnaissance (ex: [Phishing for Information](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1598) or [Search Open Websites/Domains](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1593)), establishing operational resources (ex: [Develop Capabilities](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1587) or [Obtain Capabilities](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1588)), and/or initial access (ex: [External Remote Services](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1133) or [Valid Accounts](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1078)).
Query: CVE similar to CVE-2015-8820
Matching passage: CVE-2015-8820. CWE: CWE-787. CVSS: 8.800000190734863. Adobe Flash Player before 18.0.0.268 and 19.x and 20.x before 20.0.0.228 on Windows and OS X and before 11.2.202.554 on Linux, Adobe AIR before 20.0.0.204, Adobe AIR SDK before 20.0.0.204, and Adobe AIR SDK & Compiler before 20.0.0.204 allow attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service (out-of-bounds read and memory corruption) via crafted MPEG-4 data, a different vulnerability than CVE-2015-8045, CVE-2015-8047, CVE-2015-8060, CVE-2015-8408, CVE-2015-8416, CVE-2015-8417, CVE-2015-8418, CVE-2015-8419, CVE-2015-8443, CVE-2015-8444, CVE-2015-8451, CVE-2015-8455, CVE-2015-8652, CVE-2015-8654, CVE-2015-8656, CVE-2015-8657, and CVE-2015-8658.
Near-miss passage: CVE-2015-5627. CWE: CWE-787. CVSS: 9.800000190734863. Stack-based buffer overflow in Yokogawa CENTUM CS 1000 R3.08.70 and earlier, CENTUM CS 3000 R3.09.50 and earlier, CENTUM CS 3000 Entry R3.09.50 and earlier, CENTUM VP R5.04.20 and earlier, CENTUM VP Entry R5.04.20 and earlier, ProSafe-RS R3.02.10 and earlier, Exaopc R3.72.00 and earlier, Exaquantum R2.85.00 and earlier, Exaquantum/Batch R2.50.30 and earlier, Exapilot R3.96.10 and earlier, Exaplog R3.40.00 and earlier, Exasmoc R4.03.20 and earlier, Exarqe R4.03.20 and earlier, Field Wireless Device OPC Server R2.01.02 and earlier, PRM R3.12.00 and earlier, STARDOM VDS R7.30.01 and earlier, STARDOM OPC Server for Windows R3.40 and earlier, FAST/TOOLS R10.01 and earlier, B/M9000CS R5.05.01 and earlier, B/M9000 VP R7.03.04 and earlier, and FieldMate R1.01 or R1.02 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (process outage) via a crafted packet.
Query: what is T1528
Matching passage: T1528 Steal Application Access Token. Tactics: credential access. Description: Adversaries can steal application access tokens as a means of acquiring credentials to access remote systems and resources. Application access tokens are used to make authorized API requests on behalf of a user or service and are commonly used as a way to access resources in cloud and container-based applications and software-as-a-service (SaaS).(Citation: Auth0 - Why You Should Always Use Access Tokens to Secure APIs Sept 2019) Adversaries who steal account API tokens in cloud and containerized environments may be able to access data and perform actions with the permissions of these accounts, which can lead to privilege escalation and further compromise of the environment. For example, in Kubernetes environments, processes running inside a container may communicate with the Kubernetes API server using service account tokens. If a container is compromised, an adversary may be able to steal the container’s token and thereby gain access to Kubernetes API commands.(Citation: Kubernetes Service Accounts) Similarly, instances within continuous-development / continuous-integration (CI/CD) pipelines will often use API tokens to authenticate to other services for testing and deployment.(Citation: Cider Security Top 10 CICD Security Risks) If these pipelines are compromised, adversaries may be able to steal these tokens and leverage their privileges. In Azure, an adversary who compromises a resource with an attached Managed Identity, such as an Azure VM, can request short-lived tokens through the Azure Instance Metadata Service (IMDS). These tokens can then facilitate unauthorized actions or further access to other Azure services, bypassing typical credential-based authentication.(Citation: Entra Managed Identities 2025)(Citation: SpecterOps Managed Identity 2022) Token theft can also occur through social engineering, in which case user action may be required to grant access. OAuth is one commonly implemented framework that issues tokens to users for access to systems. An ap
Near-miss passage: T1056 Input Capture. Tactics: collection, credential access. Description: Adversaries may use methods of capturing user input to obtain credentials or collect information. During normal system usage, users often provide credentials to various different locations, such as login pages/portals or system dialog boxes. Input capture mechanisms may be transparent to the user (e.g. [Credential API Hooking](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1056/004)) or rely on deceiving the user into providing input into what they believe to be a genuine service (e.g. [Web Portal Capture](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1056/003)).
Query: CVE similar to CVE-2015-7009
Matching passage: CVE-2015-7009. CWE: CWE-119. CVSS: 6.800000190734863. FontParser in Apple iOS before 9.1 and OS X before 10.11.1 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service (memory corruption) via a crafted font file, a different vulnerability than CVE-2015-6976, CVE-2015-6977, CVE-2015-6978, CVE-2015-6990, CVE-2015-6991, CVE-2015-6993, CVE-2015-7008, CVE-2015-7010, and CVE-2015-7018.
Near-miss passage: CVE-2015-3735. CWE: CWE-119. CVSS: 6.800000190734863. WebKit, as used in Apple iOS before 8.4.1 and Safari before 6.2.8, 7.x before 7.1.8, and 8.x before 8.0.8, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service (memory corruption and application crash) via a crafted web site, a different vulnerability than other WebKit CVEs listed in APPLE-SA-2015-08-13-1 and APPLE-SA-2015-08-13-3.
Query: patch priority for CVE-2015-0237
Matching passage: CVE-2015-0237. CWE: CWE-264. CVSS: 6.800000190734863. Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization (RHEV) Manager before 3.5.1 ignores the permission to deny snapshot creation during live storage migration between domains, which allows remote authenticated users to cause a denial of service (prevent host start) by creating a long snapshot chain.
Near-miss passage: CVE-2015-2953. CWE: CWE-264. CVSS: 5.0. Igreks MilkyStep Light 0.94 and earlier and Professional 1.82 and earlier allows remote attackers to bypass intended access restrictions and read files via unspecified vectors, a different vulnerability than CVE-2015-2952 and CVE-2015-2958.