CVE-2021-22893(ivanti / connect_secure)

LOWCVSS 10.0 · CRITICALCISA KEV

Signal is active with 1 mentions in latest observed window

Immediate actions

  • Track advisory updates for patch or workaround availability

Recommended action window: Monitor and triage in normal cycle

NVD description

Pulse Connect Secure 9.0R3/9.1R1 and higher is vulnerable to an authentication bypass vulnerability exposed by the Windows File Share Browser and Pulse Secure Collaboration features of Pulse Connect Secure that can allow an unauthenticated user to perform remote arbitrary code execution on the Pulse Connect Secure gateway. This vulnerability has been exploited in the wild.

0.0/ 10 priority

Sources & remediation

Listed in the CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. Federal remediation due date: 2022-05-03. Apply updates per vendor instructions.

Weakness type (CWE)
CWE-287CWE-416

Priority

LOW

Exploitation

ACTIVE

PoC

NONE

Patch

NONE

Momentum

NONE

Are you affected?

If you run products in this scope, you should treat this CVE as relevant to your environment.

  • connect_secure

Threat summary

  • 1 mentions across 1 observed day

What's happening

  • 1 total mentions across 1 day

Affected systems

Vendors
Products
connect_secure

2 versions affected across 1 product

Deep dive

Activity timeline1 mentions / 1d
00111Mentions · 2026-10-09: 110-09
Full discourse1 post
  • 🅑🅛🅐🅝🅒🅞🅢 🅚🅗🅘🅜@blancoskhim

    ZTNA migration decks draw a clean line from SSL VPN to Zscaler or Cloudflare Access. Deployment reality is messier. The VPN exit problem was never the protocol. Fortinet SSL VPN and Pulse Secure stacked up CVE after CVE (CVE-2018-13379, CVE-2019-11510, CVE-2021-22893) because the appliance sat internet-facing with a flat path behind it. ZTNA shrinks that blast radius and hands over a policy engine nobody wants to own. Every app needs an identity-aware proxy rule. Legacy apps without OIDC land behind a clientless portal that quietly reintroduces session hijacking risk. Split tunneling gets treated as a rollout checkbox when SDP terms say it decides whether lateral movement actually drops. Internal DNS is where rollouts stall. VPN handled resolver access implicitly. Connector-based ZTNA turns it into an explicit design decision. #cybersecurity

    0000033
    427 followersView on X
CPE platform detail36 entries

36 of 36 entries

PartVendorProductVersionTarget SWTarget HW
Appivanticonnect_secure9.0--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.0--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.0--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.0--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.0--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.0--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.0--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.0--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.0--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.0--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.0--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.0--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.0--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.1--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.1--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.1--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.1--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.1--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.1--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.1--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.1--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.1--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.1--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.1--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.1--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.1--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.1--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.1--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.1--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.1--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.1--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.1--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.1--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.1--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.1--
Appivanticonnect_secure9.1--

Explore more