Home / Security / CVE index / 2015
2015 NetApp CVEs
Showing 267 CVEs with a 2015 identifier. Sorted by CVE id.
Always verify. NetApp's advisory is authoritative for affected versions and fixes; NVD carries the CVSS record.
Showing 267 of 267
| CVE | Published | Severity | CVSS | Summary / Sources |
|---|---|---|---|---|
CVE-2015-0005 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150313-0001 |
CVE-2015-0204 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0001 · NTAP-20150205-0001 |
CVE-2015-0205 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150205-0001 |
CVE-2015-0206 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150205-0001 |
CVE-2015-0207 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150323-0002 |
CVE-2015-0208 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150323-0002 |
CVE-2015-0209 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150323-0002 |
CVE-2015-0235 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150127-0001 |
CVE-2015-0240 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20250509-0001 |
CVE-2015-0285 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150323-0002 |
CVE-2015-0286 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150323-0002 |
CVE-2015-0287 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150323-0002 |
CVE-2015-0288 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150323-0002 |
CVE-2015-0289 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150323-0002 |
CVE-2015-0290 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150323-0002 |
CVE-2015-0291 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150323-0002 |
CVE-2015-0292 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150323-0002 |
CVE-2015-0293 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150323-0002 |
CVE-2015-0374 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150304-0001 |
CVE-2015-0381 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150304-0001 |
CVE-2015-0382 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150304-0001 |
CVE-2015-0383 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150126-0001 |
CVE-2015-0385 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150304-0001 |
CVE-2015-0391 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150304-0001 |
CVE-2015-0395 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150126-0001 |
CVE-2015-0400 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150126-0001 |
CVE-2015-0403 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150126-0001 |
CVE-2015-0405 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0002 |
CVE-2015-0406 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150126-0001 |
CVE-2015-0407 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150126-0001 |
CVE-2015-0408 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150126-0001 |
CVE-2015-0409 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150304-0001 |
CVE-2015-0410 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150126-0001 |
CVE-2015-0411 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150304-0001 |
CVE-2015-0412 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150126-0001 |
CVE-2015-0413 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150126-0001 |
CVE-2015-0421 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150126-0001 |
CVE-2015-0423 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0002 |
CVE-2015-0432 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150304-0001 |
CVE-2015-0433 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0002 |
CVE-2015-0437 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150126-0001 |
CVE-2015-0438 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0002 |
CVE-2015-0439 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0002 |
CVE-2015-0441 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0002 |
CVE-2015-0458 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0001 |
CVE-2015-0459 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0001 |
CVE-2015-0460 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0001 |
CVE-2015-0469 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0001 |
CVE-2015-0470 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0001 |
CVE-2015-0477 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0001 |
CVE-2015-0478 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0001 |
CVE-2015-0480 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0001 |
CVE-2015-0484 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0001 |
CVE-2015-0486 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0001 |
CVE-2015-0488 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0001 |
CVE-2015-0491 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0001 |
CVE-2015-0492 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0001 |
CVE-2015-0498 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0002 |
CVE-2015-0499 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0002 |
CVE-2015-0500 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0002 |
CVE-2015-0501 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0002 |
CVE-2015-0503 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0002 |
CVE-2015-0505 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0002 |
CVE-2015-0506 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0002 |
CVE-2015-0507 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0002 |
CVE-2015-0508 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0002 |
CVE-2015-0511 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0002 |
CVE-2015-0899 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20180629-0006 |
CVE-2015-0973 | 2015-01-18 | HIGH | 8.8 | Buffer overflow in the png_read_IDAT_data function in pngrutil.c in libpng before 1.5.21 and 1.6.x before 1.6.16 allows context-dependent attackers to execute a NVD ↗ · NTAP-20240719-0005 |
CVE-2015-1787 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150323-0002 |
CVE-2015-1788 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150616-0001 |
CVE-2015-1789 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150616-0001 |
CVE-2015-1790 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150616-0001 |
CVE-2015-1791 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150616-0001 |
CVE-2015-1792 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150616-0001 |
CVE-2015-1793 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151030-0001 · NTAP-20150709-0001 |
CVE-2015-1794 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151207-0001 |
CVE-2015-20107 | 2022-04-13 | HIGH | 7.6 | In Python (aka CPython) up to 3.10.8, the mailcap module does not add escape characters into commands discovered in the system mailcap file. This may allow atta NVD ↗ · NTAP-20220616-0001 |
CVE-2015-20108 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20230703-0003 |
CVE-2015-20109 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20230731-0009 |
CVE-2015-2080 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20190307-0005 |
CVE-2015-2566 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0002 |
CVE-2015-2567 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0002 |
CVE-2015-2568 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0002 |
CVE-2015-2571 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0002 |
CVE-2015-2573 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0002 |
CVE-2015-2575 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150417-0003 |
CVE-2015-2582 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150716-0001 |
CVE-2015-2590 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150715-0001 |
CVE-2015-2596 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150715-0001 |
CVE-2015-2597 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150715-0001 |
CVE-2015-2601 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150715-0001 |
CVE-2015-2611 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150716-0001 |
CVE-2015-2613 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150715-0001 |
CVE-2015-2617 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150716-0001 |
CVE-2015-2619 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150715-0001 |
CVE-2015-2620 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150716-0001 |
CVE-2015-2621 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150715-0001 |
CVE-2015-2625 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150715-0001 |
CVE-2015-2627 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150715-0001 |
CVE-2015-2628 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150715-0001 |
CVE-2015-2632 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150715-0001 |
CVE-2015-2637 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150715-0001 |
CVE-2015-2638 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150715-0001 |
CVE-2015-2639 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150716-0001 |
CVE-2015-2641 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150716-0001 |
CVE-2015-2643 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150716-0001 |
CVE-2015-2648 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150716-0001 |
CVE-2015-2659 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150715-0001 |
CVE-2015-2661 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150716-0001 |
CVE-2015-2664 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150715-0001 |
CVE-2015-2808 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150715-0001 · NTAP-20150122-0001 |
CVE-2015-2992 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20200330-0001 |
CVE-2015-3193 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151207-0001 |
CVE-2015-3194 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20160421-0001 · NTAP-20151207-0001 |
CVE-2015-3195 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151207-0001 |
CVE-2015-3196 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151207-0001 |
CVE-2015-3197 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20160201-0001 |
CVE-2015-3253 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20160623-0001 |
CVE-2015-3292 | 2015-05-31 | — | — | The installer in NetApp OnCommand Workflow Automation before 2.2.1P1 and 3.x before 3.0P1 sets up the Java Debugging Wire Protocol (JDWP) service, which allows NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150528-0001 |
CVE-2015-3963 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20160324-0001 |
CVE-2015-4000 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150715-0001 · NTAP-20150619-0001 +1 |
CVE-2015-4165 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20160623-0003 |
CVE-2015-4620 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20190903-0003 |
CVE-2015-4729 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150715-0001 |
CVE-2015-4730 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151030-0001 |
CVE-2015-4731 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150715-0001 |
CVE-2015-4732 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150715-0001 |
CVE-2015-4733 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150715-0001 |
CVE-2015-4734 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151028-0001 |
CVE-2015-4736 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150715-0001 |
CVE-2015-4737 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150716-0001 |
CVE-2015-4748 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150715-0001 |
CVE-2015-4749 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150715-0001 |
CVE-2015-4752 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150716-0001 |
CVE-2015-4756 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150716-0001 |
CVE-2015-4757 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150716-0001 |
CVE-2015-4760 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150715-0001 |
CVE-2015-4761 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150716-0001 |
CVE-2015-4766 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151030-0001 |
CVE-2015-4767 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150716-0001 |
CVE-2015-4769 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150716-0001 |
CVE-2015-4771 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150716-0001 |
CVE-2015-4772 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20150716-0001 |
CVE-2015-4791 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151030-0001 |
CVE-2015-4792 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151030-0001 |
CVE-2015-4800 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151030-0001 |
CVE-2015-4802 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151030-0001 |
CVE-2015-4803 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151028-0001 |
CVE-2015-4805 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151028-0001 |
CVE-2015-4806 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151028-0001 |
CVE-2015-4807 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151030-0001 |
CVE-2015-4810 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151028-0001 |
CVE-2015-4815 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151030-0001 |
CVE-2015-4816 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151030-0001 |
CVE-2015-4819 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151030-0001 |
CVE-2015-4826 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151030-0001 |
CVE-2015-4830 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151030-0001 |
CVE-2015-4833 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151030-0001 |
CVE-2015-4835 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151028-0001 |
CVE-2015-4836 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151030-0001 |
CVE-2015-4840 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151028-0001 |
CVE-2015-4842 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151028-0001 |
CVE-2015-4843 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151028-0001 |
CVE-2015-4844 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151028-0001 |
CVE-2015-4852 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151123-0001 |
CVE-2015-4858 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151030-0001 |
CVE-2015-4860 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151028-0001 |
CVE-2015-4861 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151030-0001 |
CVE-2015-4862 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151030-0001 |
CVE-2015-4864 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151030-0001 |
CVE-2015-4866 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151030-0001 |
CVE-2015-4868 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151028-0001 |
CVE-2015-4870 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151030-0001 |
CVE-2015-4871 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151028-0001 |
CVE-2015-4872 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151028-0001 |
CVE-2015-4879 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151030-0001 |
CVE-2015-4881 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151028-0001 |
CVE-2015-4882 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151028-0001 |
CVE-2015-4883 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151028-0001 |
CVE-2015-4890 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151030-0001 |
CVE-2015-4893 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151028-0001 |
CVE-2015-4895 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151030-0001 |
CVE-2015-4901 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151028-0001 |
CVE-2015-4902 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151028-0001 |
CVE-2015-4903 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151028-0001 |
CVE-2015-4904 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151030-0001 |
CVE-2015-4905 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151030-0001 |
CVE-2015-4906 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151028-0001 |
CVE-2015-4908 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151028-0001 |
CVE-2015-4910 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151030-0001 |
CVE-2015-4911 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151028-0001 |
CVE-2015-4913 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151030-0001 |
CVE-2015-4916 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151028-0001 |
CVE-2015-5146 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20180731-0003 |
CVE-2015-5169 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20180629-0003 |
CVE-2015-5174 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20180531-0001 |
CVE-2015-5209 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20180629-0002 |
CVE-2015-5300 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20171004-0001 |
CVE-2015-5345 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20180531-0001 |
CVE-2015-5346 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20180531-0001 |
CVE-2015-5351 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20180531-0001 |
CVE-2015-5352 | 2015-08-03 | — | — | The x11_open_helper function in channels.c in ssh in OpenSSH before 6.9, when ForwardX11Trusted mode is not used, lacks a check of the refusal deadline for X co NVD ↗ · NTAP-20181023-0001 |
CVE-2015-5377 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20160623-0003 |
CVE-2015-5477 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20160114-0001 |
CVE-2015-5531 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20160623-0003 |
CVE-2015-5600 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151106-0001 |
CVE-2015-5722 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20190730-0001 |
CVE-2015-5986 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20190730-0001 |
CVE-2015-6563 | 2015-08-24 | MEDIUM | 6.4 | The monitor component in sshd in OpenSSH before 7.0 on non-OpenBSD platforms accepts extraneous username data in MONITOR_REQ_PAM_INIT_CTX requests, which allows NVD ↗ · NTAP-20180201-0002 |
CVE-2015-6564 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20160330-0001 |
CVE-2015-6565 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20160330-0001 |
CVE-2015-7501 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20240216-0010 |
CVE-2015-7547 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20160217-0002 |
CVE-2015-7575 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20160225-0001 · NTAP-20160121-0001 |
CVE-2015-7599 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151029-0001 |
CVE-2015-7691 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20171004-0001 |
CVE-2015-7692 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20171004-0001 |
CVE-2015-7701 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20171004-0001 |
CVE-2015-7702 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20171004-0001 |
CVE-2015-7703 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20171004-0001 |
CVE-2015-7704 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20171004-0002 · NTAP-20171004-0001 |
CVE-2015-7705 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20171004-0001 |
CVE-2015-7744 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20160121-0002 |
CVE-2015-7746 | 2017-09-01 | CRITICAL | 9.8 | NetApp Data ONTAP before 8.2.4, when operating in 7-Mode, allows remote attackers to bypass authentication and (1) obtain sensitive information from or (2) modi NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151112-0001 |
CVE-2015-7848 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20171004-0001 |
CVE-2015-7849 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20171004-0001 |
CVE-2015-7850 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20171004-0001 |
CVE-2015-7851 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20171004-0001 |
CVE-2015-7852 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20171004-0001 |
CVE-2015-7853 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20171004-0001 |
CVE-2015-7854 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20171004-0001 |
CVE-2015-7855 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20171004-0001 |
CVE-2015-7871 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20171004-0001 |
CVE-2015-7886 | 2016-01-18 | LOW | 3.7 | NetApp Data ONTAP before 8.2.4P1, when 7-Mode and HTTP access are enabled, allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive volume information via unspecified vector NVD ↗ · NTAP-20160114-0002 |
CVE-2015-7887 | 2017-08-07 | HIGH | 8.1 | NetApp SnapCenter Server 1.0 allows remote authenticated users to list and delete backups. NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151026-0001 |
CVE-2015-7973 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20171031-0001 |
CVE-2015-7974 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20171031-0001 |
CVE-2015-7975 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20171031-0001 |
CVE-2015-7976 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20171031-0001 |
CVE-2015-7977 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20171031-0001 |
CVE-2015-7978 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20171031-0001 |
CVE-2015-7979 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20171031-0001 |
CVE-2015-8000 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20160317-0001 |
CVE-2015-8020 | 2017-01-11 | LOW | 3.7 | Clustered Data ONTAP versions 8.0, 8.3.1, and 8.3.2 contain a default privileged account which under certain conditions can be used for unauthorized information NVD ↗ · NTAP-20160802-0001 |
CVE-2015-8126 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20160121-0001 |
CVE-2015-8138 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20171031-0001 · NTAP-20171004-0002 |
CVE-2015-8139 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20200204-0003 |
CVE-2015-8140 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20200204-0003 |
CVE-2015-8158 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20171031-0001 |
CVE-2015-8322 | 2017-02-07 | HIGH | 8.8 | NetApp OnCommand System Manager 8.3.x before 8.3.2 allows remote authenticated users to execute arbitrary code via unspecified vectors. NVD ↗ · NTAP-20160310-0003 |
CVE-2015-8325 | 2016-05-01 | HIGH | 7.8 | The do_setup_env function in session.c in sshd in OpenSSH through 7.2p2, when the UseLogin feature is enabled and PAM is configured to read .pam_environment fil NVD ↗ · NTAP-20180628-0001 |
CVE-2015-8383 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20230216-0002 |
CVE-2015-8386 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20230216-0002 |
CVE-2015-8387 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20230216-0002 |
CVE-2015-8389 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20230216-0002 |
CVE-2015-8390 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20230216-0002 |
CVE-2015-8391 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20230216-0002 |
CVE-2015-8393 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20230216-0002 |
CVE-2015-8394 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20230216-0002 |
CVE-2015-8461 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20160317-0001 |
CVE-2015-8544 | 2017-02-07 | HIGH | 7.5 | NetApp SnapDrive for Windows before 7.0.2P4, 7.0.3, and 7.1 before 7.1.3P1 allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive information via unspecified vectors. NVD ↗ · NTAP-20160111-0001 |
CVE-2015-8545 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20151123-0001 |
CVE-2015-8704 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20160322-0001 |
CVE-2015-8705 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20160322-0001 |
CVE-2015-8960 | 2016-09-21 | HIGH | 8.1 | The TLS protocol 1.2 and earlier supports the rsa_fixed_dh, dss_fixed_dh, rsa_fixed_ecdh, and ecdsa_fixed_ecdh values for ClientCertificateType but does not dir NVD ↗ · NTAP-20180626-0002 |
CVE-2015-9251 | — | — | — | NVD ↗ · NTAP-20210108-0004 |
Years: 2026 · 2025 · 2024 · 2023 · 2022 · 2021 · 2020 · 2019 · 2018 · 2017 · 2016 · 2015 · 2014 · 2013 · 2012 · 2011 · 2010 · 2009 · 2008 · 2007 · 2006 · 2005 · 2004 · 2003 · 2002 · 1999