AI-generated from public sourcesThe starting point for every profile: auto-generated by 0-Doubt from public vendor materials, and not yet confirmed by the vendor or an independent analyst. Nothing here is hidden or overstated — it simply has not been reviewed yet.Where every profile starts, before the vendor or an analyst has reviewed it. A higher label means a more independent source — not a better product.How trust works →Secure coding rating: 30/100How this score is computedA product with no known CVEs starts at a neutral score and climbs the longer it goes without one; a product with known CVEs is penalized by severity instead. This one has 2 known CVEs (vendor-level match — see the CVE list below) and is tracked as ~107 days old in our catalog (a stand-in for real release date, which we don't track). The platform admin controls the formula's weights.
Network infrastructure automation platform for cyber resilience tasks
Known CVEs (2)About this listSourced from the public NVD database, matched by vendor name. Shown here at the vendor level — we don't track per-product/version data, so a listed CVE may affect a different product from this vendor, not necessarily this one. “New” means published within the last 30 days. “Actively exploited” means CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog confirms real-world exploitation, not just a theoretical severity score. An “EPSS” chip appears at 10% and above: that is FIRST's estimated chance of exploitation in the next 30 days, which measures likelihood rather than impact and so can differ sharply from the severity beside it.
ETINET BACKBOX E4.09 and H4.09 mismanages password access control. When a user uses the User ID of the process running BBSV to login to the Backbox UI application, the system procedure (USER_AUTHENTIC…
BackBox Linux 4.6 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (ksoftirqd CPU consumption) via a flood of packets with Martian source IP addresses (as defined in RFC 1812 section 5.3.7). This …
