alirezaaminzadeh/secembed-pairs huggingface dataset:
Query: describe CVE-2015-10003
Matching passage: CVE-2015-10003. CWE: CWE-441. CVSS: 4.300000190734863. A vulnerability, which was classified as problematic, was found in FileZilla Server up to 0.9.50. This affects an unknown part of the component PORT Handler. The manipulation leads to unintended intermediary. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. Upgrading to version 0.9.51 is able to address this issue. It is recommended to upgrade the affected component.
Near-miss passage: CVE-2015-2947. CWE: CWE-441. CVSS: 9.100000381469727. KanColleViewer versions 3.8.1 and earlier operates as an open proxy which allows remote attackers to trigger outbound network traffic.
Query: patch priority for CVE-2015-7439
Matching passage: CVE-2015-7439. CWE: CWE-79. CVSS: 6.099999904632568. Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in InfoSphere Data Architect (IDA), as distributed in IBM Rational Software Architect 8.5 through 9.5, Rational Software Architect for WebSphere Software (RSA4WS) 8.5 through 9.5, and Rational Software Architect RealTime (RSART) 8.5 through 9.5, allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via a crafted URL.
Near-miss passage: CVE-2015-2870. CWE: CWE-79. CVSS: 4.300000190734863. Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability on Chiyu BF-630, BF-630W, and BF-660C fingerprint access-control devices allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via a SCRIPT element.
Query: risk of MailEnable before 8.60 allows Stored XSS via malformed use of "<img/src" with no ">" character in the body of an e-mail message.
Matching passage: CVE-2015-9279. CWE: CWE-79. CVSS: 6.099999904632568. MailEnable before 8.60 allows Stored XSS via malformed use of "<img/src" with no ">" character in the body of an e-mail message.
Near-miss passage: CVE-2015-1979. CWE: CWE-79. CVSS: 3.5. Multiple cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities in the Error dialog in IBM Case Manager 5.2.1 before 5.2.1.2 allow remote authenticated users to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via crafted input to the (1) addressability or (2) comments component.
Query: common weakness: Improper Neutralization of CRLF Sequences in HTTP Headers ('HTTP Request/Response Splitting')
Matching passage: CWE-113 Improper Neutralization of CRLF Sequences in HTTP Headers ('HTTP Request/Response Splitting'). The product receives data from an HTTP agent/component (e.g., web server, proxy, browser, etc.), but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes CR and LF characters before the data is included in outgoing HTTP headers.
Near-miss passage: CWE-564 SQL Injection: Hibernate. Using Hibernate to execute a dynamic SQL statement built with user-controlled input can allow an attacker to modify the statement's meaning or to execute arbitrary SQL commands.
Query: secure coding against Failure to Sanitize Paired Delimiters
Matching passage: CWE-157 Failure to Sanitize Paired Delimiters. The product does not properly handle the characters that are used to mark the beginning and ending of a group of entities, such as parentheses, brackets, and braces.
Near-miss passage: CWE-278 Insecure Preserved Inherited Permissions. A product inherits a set of insecure permissions for an object, e.g. when copying from an archive file, without user awareness or involvement.
Query: actor TTPs: Establish Accounts
Matching passage: T1585 Establish Accounts. Tactics: resource development. Description: Adversaries may create and cultivate accounts with services that can be used during targeting. Adversaries can create accounts that can be used to build a persona to further operations. Persona development consists of the development of public information, presence, history and appropriate affiliations. This development could be applied to social media, website, or other publicly available information that could be referenced and scrutinized for legitimacy over the course of an operation using that persona or identity.(Citation: NEWSCASTER2014)(Citation: BlackHatRobinSage) For operations incorporating social engineering, the utilization of an online persona may be important. These personas may be fictitious or impersonate real people. The persona may exist on a single site or across multiple sites (ex: Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, Google, GitHub, Docker Hub, etc.). Establishing a persona may require development of additional documentation to make them seem real. This could include filling out profile information, developing social networks, or incorporating photos.(Citation: NEWSCASTER2014)(Citation: BlackHatRobinSage) Establishing accounts can also include the creation of accounts with email providers, which may be directly leveraged for [Phishing for Information](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1598) or [Phishing](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1566).(Citation: Mandiant APT1) In addition, establishing accounts may allow adversaries to abuse free services, such as registering for trial periods to [Acquire Infrastructure](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1583) for malicious purposes.(Citation: Free Trial PurpleUrchin)
Near-miss passage: T1585.002 Email Accounts. Tactics: resource development. Description: Adversaries may create email accounts that can be used during targeting. Adversaries can use accounts created with email providers to further their operations, such as leveraging them to conduct [Phishing for Information](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1598) or [Phishing](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1566).(Citation: Mandiant APT1) Establishing email accounts may also allow adversaries to abuse free services – such as trial periods – to [Acquire Infrastructure](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1583) for follow-on purposes.(Citation: Free Trial PurpleUrchin) Adversaries may also take steps to cultivate a persona around the email account, such as through use of [Social Media Accounts](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1585/001), to increase the chance of success of follow-on behaviors. Created email accounts can also be used in the acquisition of infrastructure (ex: [Domains](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1583/001)).(Citation: Mandiant APT1) To decrease the chance of physically tying back operations to themselves, adversaries may make use of disposable email services.(Citation: Trend Micro R980 2016)
Query: CVE similar to CVE-2015-6330
Matching passage: CVE-2015-6330. CWE: CWE-352. CVSS: 6.800000190734863. Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in Cisco Prime Collaboration Assurance 10.5(1) and 10.6 allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of arbitrary users, aka Bug ID CSCus62712.
Near-miss passage: CVE-2015-2912. CWE: CWE-352. CVSS: 8.800000190734863. The JSONP endpoint in the Studio component in OrientDB Server Community Edition before 2.0.15 and 2.1.x before 2.1.1 does not properly restrict callback values, which allows remote attackers to conduct cross-site request forgery (CSRF) attacks, and obtain sensitive information, via a crafted HTTP request.
Query: exploit Cisco Cloud Portal in Cisco Prime Service Catalog 9.4.1_vortex on Cloud Portal appliances allows man-in-the-middle attackers to modify data via unspecified vectors, aka Bug ID CSCu
Matching passage: CVE-2015-4190. CWE: UNKNOWN. CVSS: 4.300000190734863. Cisco Cloud Portal in Cisco Prime Service Catalog 9.4.1_vortex on Cloud Portal appliances allows man-in-the-middle attackers to modify data via unspecified vectors, aka Bug ID CSCuh19683.
Near-miss passage: CVE-2015-0470. CWE: UNKNOWN. CVSS: 4.300000190734863. Unspecified vulnerability in Oracle Java SE 8u40 allows remote attackers to affect integrity via unknown vectors related to Hotspot.
Query: indicators of Relocate Malware
Matching passage: T1070.010 Relocate Malware. Tactics: stealth. Description: Once a payload is delivered, adversaries may reproduce copies of the same malware on the victim system to remove evidence of their presence and/or avoid defenses. Copying malware payloads to new locations may also be combined with [File Deletion](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1070/004) to cleanup older artifacts. Relocating malware may be a part of many actions intended to evade defenses. For example, adversaries may copy and rename payloads to better blend into the local environment (i.e., [Match Legitimate Resource Name or Location](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1036/005)).(Citation: DFIR Report Trickbot June 2023) Payloads may also be repositioned to target [File/Path Exclusions](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1564/012) as well as specific locations associated with establishing [Persistence](https://attack.mitre.org/tactics/TA0003).(Citation: Latrodectus APR 2024) Relocating malicious payloads may also hinder defensive analysis, especially to separate these payloads from earlier events (such as [User Execution](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1204) and [Phishing](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1566)) that may have generated alerts or otherwise drawn attention from defenders. Moving payloads into target directories does not alter the Creation timestamp, thereby evading detection logic reliant on modifications to this artifact (i.e., [Timestomp](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1070/006)).
Near-miss passage: T1070.004 File Deletion. Tactics: stealth. Description: Adversaries may delete files left behind by the actions of their intrusion activity. Malware, tools, or other non-native files dropped or created on a system by an adversary (ex: [Ingress Tool Transfer](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1105)) may leave traces to indicate to what was done within a network and how. Removal of these files can occur during an intrusion, or as part of a post-intrusion process to minimize the adversary's footprint. There are tools available from the host operating system to perform cleanup, but adversaries may use other tools as well.(Citation: Microsoft SDelete July 2016) Examples of built-in [Command and Scripting Interpreter](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1059) functions include <code>del</code> on Windows, <code>rm</code> or <code>unlink</code> on Linux and macOS, and `rm` on ESXi.
Query: rule covering Detects when secret scanning rule is deleted for the project or repository.
Matching passage: Sigma rule: Detects when secret scanning rule is deleted for the project or repository.. Logsource: bitbucket / audit. Rule: title: Bitbucket Secret Scanning Rule Deleted id: ff91e3f0-ad15-459f-9a85-1556390c138d status: test description: Detects when secret scanning rule is deleted for the project or repository. references: - https://confluence.atlassian.com/bitbucketserver/audit-log-events-776640423.html - https://confluence.atlassian.com/bitbucketserver/secret-scanning-1157471613.html author: Muhammad Faisal (@faisalusuf) date: 2024-02-25 tags: - attack.defense-impairment - attack.t1685 logsource: product: bitbucket service: audit definition: 'Requirements: "Basic" log level is required to receive these audit events.' detection: selection: auditType.category: - Projects - Repositories auditType.action: - Project secret scanning rule deleted - Repository secret scanning rule deleted condition: selection falsepositives: - Legitimate user activity. level: low
Near-miss passage: Sigma rule: Detects the use of the Group Policy Management Editor (GPME) to modify Default Domain or Default Domain Controllers Grou. Logsource: windows / process_creation. Rule: title: Windows Default Domain GPO Modification via GPME id: dcff7e85-d01f-4eb5-badd-84e2e6be8294 related: - id: e5ac86dd-2da1-454b-be74-05d26c769d7d type: similar status: experimental description: 'Detects the use of the Group Policy Management Editor (GPME) to modify Default Domain or Default Domain Controllers Group Policy Objects (GPOs). Adversaries may leverage GPME to make stealthy changes in these default GPOs to deploy malicious GPOs configurations across the domain without raising suspicion. ' references: - https://www.trendmicro.com/en_us/research/25/i/unmasking-the-gentlemen-ransomware.html - https://adsecurity.org/?p=3377 - https://sdmsoftware.com/general-stuff/launching-the-new-gp-management-editor-from-the-command-line/ - https://www.pentestpartners.com/security-blog/living-off-the-land-gpo-style/ author: TropChaud date: 2025-11-22 tags: - attack.privilege-escalation - attack.defense-impairment - attack.t1484.001 logsource: product: windows category: process_creation detection: selection_mmc: - Image|endswith: \mmc.exe - OriginalFileName: MMC.exe selection_gpme: CommandLine|contains|all: - gpme.msc - 'gpobject:' selection_default_gpos: CommandLine|contains: - 31B2F340-016D-11D2-945F-00C04FB984F9 - 6AC1786C-016F-11D2-945F-00C04FB984F9 condition: all of selection_* falsepositives: - Legitimate use of GPME to modify GPOs level: medium
Query: EDR alert: possible Traffic Duplication (T1020.001)
Matching passage: T1020.001 Traffic Duplication. Tactics: exfiltration. Description: Adversaries may leverage traffic mirroring in order to automate data exfiltration over compromised infrastructure. Traffic mirroring is a native feature for some devices, often used for network analysis. For example, devices may be configured to forward network traffic to one or more destinations for analysis by a network analyzer or other monitoring device. (Citation: Cisco Traffic Mirroring)(Citation: Juniper Traffic Mirroring) Adversaries may abuse traffic mirroring to mirror or redirect network traffic through other infrastructure they control. Malicious modifications to network devices to enable traffic redirection may be possible through [ROMMONkit](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1542/004) or [Patch System Image](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1601/001).(Citation: US-CERT-TA18-106A)(Citation: Cisco Blog Legacy Device Attacks) Many cloud-based environments also support traffic mirroring. 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) Adversaries may use traffic duplication in conjunction with [Network Sniffing](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1040), [Input Capture](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1056), or [Adversary-in-the-Middle](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1557) depending on the goals and objectives of the adversary.
Near-miss passage: T1020 Automated Exfiltration. Tactics: exfiltration. Description: Adversaries may exfiltrate data, such as sensitive documents, through the use of automated processing after being gathered during Collection.(Citation: ESET Gamaredon June 2020) When automated exfiltration is used, other exfiltration techniques likely apply as well to transfer the information out of the network, such as [Exfiltration Over C2 Channel](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1041) and [Exfiltration Over Alternative Protocol](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1048).
Query: SOC alert related to Domain Groups
Matching passage: T1069.002 Domain Groups. Tactics: discovery. Description: Adversaries may attempt to find domain-level groups and permission settings. The knowledge of domain-level permission groups can help adversaries determine which groups exist and which users belong to a particular group. Adversaries may use this information to determine which users have elevated permissions, such as domain administrators. Commands such as <code>net group /domain</code> of the [Net](https://attack.mitre.org/software/S0039) utility, <code>dscacheutil -q group</code> on macOS, and <code>ldapsearch</code> on Linux can list domain-level groups.
Near-miss passage: T1069.001 Local Groups. Tactics: discovery. Description: Adversaries may attempt to find local system groups and permission settings. The knowledge of local system permission groups can help adversaries determine which groups exist and which users belong to a particular group. Adversaries may use this information to determine which users have elevated permissions, such as the users found within the local administrators group. Commands such as <code>net localgroup</code> of the [Net](https://attack.mitre.org/software/S0039) utility, <code>dscl . -list /Groups</code> on macOS, and <code>groups</code> on Linux can list local groups.
Query: risk of In Android before 2018-04-05 or earlier security patch level on Qualcomm Snapdragon Automobile, Snapdragon Mobile, and Snapdragon Wear MDM9206, MDM9650, MSM8909W, SD 210/SD 212/SD 
Matching passage: CVE-2015-9203. CWE: CWE-119. CVSS: 9.800000190734863. In Android before 2018-04-05 or earlier security patch level on Qualcomm Snapdragon Automobile, Snapdragon Mobile, and Snapdragon Wear MDM9206, MDM9650, MSM8909W, SD 210/SD 212/SD 205, SD 400, SD 410/12, SD 425, SD 430, SD 450, SD 615/16/SD 415, SD 617, SD 625, SD 650/52, SD 800, SD 808, SD 810, SD 820, SD 820A, SD 835, SD 845, and SD 850, lack of input validation in playready_set_domainid could lead to a buffer overread.
Near-miss passage: CVE-2015-3831. CWE: CWE-119. CVSS: 9.300000190734863. Buffer overflow in the readAt function in BpMediaHTTPConnection in media/libmedia/IMediaHTTPConnection.cpp in the mediaserver service in Android before 5.1.1 LMY48I allows attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted application, aka internal bug 19400722.
Query: CVE similar to CVE-2015-1835
Matching passage: CVE-2015-1835. CWE: CWE-20. CVSS: 5.300000190734863. Apache Cordova Android before 3.7.2 and 4.x before 4.0.2, when an application does not set explicit values in config.xml, allows remote attackers to modify undefined secondary configuration variables (preferences) via a crafted intent: URL.
Near-miss passage: CVE-2015-2672. CWE: CWE-20. CVSS: 5.5. The xsave/xrstor implementation in arch/x86/include/asm/xsave.h in the Linux kernel before 3.19.2 creates certain .altinstr_replacement pointers and consequently does not provide any protection against instruction faulting, which allows local users to cause a denial of service (panic) by triggering a fault, as demonstrated by an unaligned memory operand or a non-canonical address memory operand.
Query: telemetry for T1499.002
Matching passage: T1499.002 Service Exhaustion Flood. Tactics: impact. Description: Adversaries may target the different network services provided by systems to conduct a denial of service (DoS). Adversaries often target the availability of DNS and web services, however others have been targeted as well.(Citation: Arbor AnnualDoSreport Jan 2018) Web server software can be attacked through a variety of means, some of which apply generally while others are specific to the software being used to provide the service. One example of this type of attack is known as a simple HTTP flood, where an adversary sends a large number of HTTP requests to a web server to overwhelm it and/or an application that runs on top of it. This flood relies on raw volume to accomplish the objective, exhausting any of the various resources required by the victim software to provide the service.(Citation: Cloudflare HTTPflood) Another variation, known as a SSL renegotiation attack, takes advantage of a protocol feature in SSL/TLS. The SSL/TLS protocol suite includes mechanisms for the client and server to agree on an encryption algorithm to use for subsequent secure connections. If SSL renegotiation is enabled, a request can be made for renegotiation of the crypto algorithm. In a renegotiation attack, the adversary establishes a SSL/TLS connection and then proceeds to make a series of renegotiation requests. Because the cryptographic renegotiation has a meaningful cost in computation cycles, this can cause an impact to the availability of the service when done in volume.(Citation: Arbor SSLDoS April 2012)
Near-miss passage: T1499.004 Application or System Exploitation. Tactics: impact. Description: Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities that can cause an application or system to crash and deny availability to users. (Citation: Sucuri BIND9 August 2015) Some systems may automatically restart critical applications and services when crashes occur, but they can likely be re-exploited to cause a persistent denial of service (DoS) condition. Adversaries may exploit known or zero-day vulnerabilities to crash applications and/or systems, which may also lead to dependent applications and/or systems to be in a DoS condition. Crashed or restarted applications or systems may also have other effects such as [Data Destruction](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1485), [Firmware Corruption](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1495), [Service Stop](https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1489) etc. which may further cause a DoS condition and deny availability to critical information, applications and/or systems.
Query: explain CWE-749
Matching passage: CWE-749 Exposed Dangerous Method or Function. The product provides an Applications Programming Interface (API) or similar interface for interaction with external actors, but the interface includes a dangerous method or function that is not properly restricted.
Near-miss passage: CWE-87 Improper Neutralization of Alternate XSS Syntax. The product does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes user-controlled input for alternate script syntax.
Query: describe CVE-2015-3227
Matching passage: CVE-2015-3227. CWE: UNKNOWN. CVSS: 5.0. The (1) jdom.rb and (2) rexml.rb components in Active Support in Ruby on Rails before 4.1.11 and 4.2.x before 4.2.2, when JDOM or REXML is enabled, allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service (SystemStackError) via a large XML document depth.
Near-miss passage: CVE-2015-0353. CWE: UNKNOWN. CVSS: 10.0. Adobe Flash Player before 13.0.0.281 and 14.x through 17.x before 17.0.0.169 on Windows and OS X and before 11.2.202.457 on Linux allows attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service (memory corruption) via unspecified vectors, a different vulnerability than CVE-2015-0347, CVE-2015-0350, CVE-2015-0352, CVE-2015-0354, CVE-2015-0355, CVE-2015-0360, CVE-2015-3038, CVE-2015-3041, CVE-2015-3042, and CVE-2015-3043.