|
CVE-2026-41854
|
Medium
|
2026-06-09
|
No exploit published
|
No public exploit
|
Due to incorrect host parsing, applications that rely on UriComponentsBuilder to parse and validate an externally provided URL string may be exposed to a server-side request forgery (SSRF) attack.
Affected versions:
Spring Framework 7.0.0 through 7.0.7; 6.2.0 through 6.2.18.
|
|
CVE-2026-41853
|
Medium
|
2026-06-09
|
No exploit published
|
No public exploit
|
Spring MVC and WebFlux applications are vulnerable to Multipart request smuggling attacks.
Affected versions:
Spring Framework 7.0.0 through 7.0.7; 6.2.0 through 6.2.18; 6.1.0 through 6.1.27; 5.3.0 through 5.3.48.
|
|
CVE-2026-41847
|
Medium
|
2026-06-09
|
No exploit published
|
No public exploit
|
Spring WebFlux applications may be vulnerable to a security bypass when using the Kotlin Router DSL.
Affected versions:
Spring Framework 5.3.0 through 5.3.48.
|
|
CVE-2026-41846
|
Medium
|
2026-06-09
|
No exploit published
|
No public exploit
|
Spring MVC applications which accept user-supplied values in the cssClass, cssErrorClass, or cssStyle attributes of JSP form tags allow arbitrary HTML/JavaScript code injection, potentially resulting in a cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability.
Affected versions:
Spring Framework 7.0.0 through 7.0.7; 6.2.0 through 6.2.18; 6.1.0 through 6.1.27; 5.3.0 through 5.3.48.
|
|
CVE-2026-41845
|
High
|
2026-06-09
|
No exploit published
|
No public exploit
|
Due to incorrect escaping, the use of JavaScriptUtils.javaScriptEscape() may lead to JavaScript code injection in the browser, potentially resulting in a cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability.
Affected versions:
Spring Framework 7.0.0 through 7.0.7; 6.2.0 through 6.2.18; 6.1.0 through 6.1.27; 5.3.0 through 5.3.48.
|
|
CVE-2026-41844
|
Medium
|
2026-06-09
|
No exploit published
|
No public exploit
|
A Spring MVC or Spring WebFlux application which configures a mapping for "/**" where the view name is not explicitly specified allows an attacker to craft a link resulting in a 302 redirect to an arbitrary external host via the redirect: prefix.
Affected versions:
Spring Framework 7.0.0 through 7.0.7; 6.2.0 through 6.2.18; 6.1.0 through 6.1.27; 5.3.0 through 5.3.48.
|
|
CVE-2026-41843
|
Medium
|
2026-06-09
|
Protected by RASP
|
No public exploit
|
Spring MVC and WebFlux applications are vulnerable to Path Traversal attacks when resolving static resources.
Affected versions:
Spring Framework 7.0.0 through 7.0.7; 6.2.0 through 6.2.18; 6.1.0 through 6.1.27; 5.3.0 through 5.3.48.
|
|
CVE-2026-41842
|
High
|
2026-06-09
|
No exploit published
|
No public exploit
|
Spring MVC and WebFlux applications are vulnerable to Denial of Service (DoS) attacks when resolving static resources.
Affected versions:
Spring Framework 7.0.0 through 7.0.7; 6.2.0 through 6.2.18; 6.1.0 through 6.1.27; 5.3.0 through 5.3.48.
|
|
CVE-2026-41841
|
Medium
|
2026-06-09
|
No exploit published
|
No public exploit
|
Spring MVC and WebFlux applications are vulnerable to Information Disclosure attacks when resolving static resources.
Affected versions:
Spring Framework 7.0.0 through 7.0.7; 6.2.0 through 6.2.18; 6.1.0 through 6.1.27; 5.3.0 through 5.3.48.
|
|
CVE-2026-41840
|
Medium
|
2026-06-09
|
No exploit published
|
No public exploit
|
Spring WebFlux applications are vulnerable to Denial of Service (DoS) attacks when processing multipart requests.
Affected versions: Spring Framework 7.0.0 through 7.0.7, 6.2.0 through 6.2.18, 6.1.0 through 6.1.27, 5.3.0 through 5.3.48.
|
|
CVE-2026-41839
|
Medium
|
2026-06-09
|
No exploit published
|
No public exploit
|
A WebFlux application with a compromised subdomain (for example, compromised via cross-site scripting (XSS)) is vulnerable to an escalation attack exchanging a known session ID for that of an authenticated user.
Affected versions:
Spring Framework 7.0.0 through 7.0.7; 6.2.0 through 6.2.18; 6.1.0 through 6.1.27; 5.3.0 through 5.3.48.
|
|
CVE-2026-41838
|
High
|
2026-06-09
|
No exploit published
|
No public exploit
|
IDs for WebSocket sessions in the spring-websocket module are not cryptographically unpredictable, which may be possible to exploit in combination with inadequate authorization rules.
Affected versions:
Spring Framework 7.0.0 through 7.0.7; 6.2.0 through 6.2.18; 6.1.0 through 6.1.27; 5.3.0 through 5.3.48.
|
|
CVE-2026-22745
|
Medium
|
2026-04-29
|
No exploit published
|
No public exploit
|
Spring MVC and WebFlux applications are vulnerable to Denial of Service attacks when resolving static resources.
More precisely, an application can be vulnerable when all the following are true:
* the application is using Spring MVC or Spring WebFlux
* the application is serving static resources from the file system
* the application is running on a Windows platform
When all the conditions above are met, the attacker can send malicious requests that are slow to resolve and that can keep HTTP connections in use. This can cause a Denial of Service on the application.
|
|
CVE-2026-22741
|
Low
|
2026-04-29
|
No exploit published
|
No public exploit
|
Spring MVC and WebFlux applications are vulnerable to cache poisoning when resolving static resources.
More precisely, an application can be vulnerable when all the following are true:
* the application is using Spring MVC or Spring WebFlux
* the application is configuring the resource chain support https://docs.spring.io/spring-framework/reference/web/webmvc/mvc-config/static-resources.html#page-title with caching enabled
* the application adds support for encoded resources resolution
* the resource cache must be empty when the attacker has access to the application
When all the conditions above are met, the attacker can send malicious requests and poison the resource cache with resources using the wrong encoding. This can cause a denial of service by breaking the front-end application for clients.
|
|
CVE-2026-22740
|
Medium
|
2026-04-29
|
No exploit published
|
No public exploit
|
A WebFlux server application that processes multipart requests creates temp files for parts larger than 10 K. Under some circumstances, temp files may remain not deleted after the request is fully processed. This allows an attacker to consume available disk space.
Older, unsupported versions are also affected.
|
|
CVE-2026-22737
|
Medium
|
2026-03-20
|
No exploit published
|
No public exploit
|
Use of Java scripting engine enabled (e.g. JRuby, Jython) template views in Spring MVC and Spring WebFlux applications can result in disclosure of content from files outside the configured locations for script template views. This issue affects Spring Framework: from 7.0.0 through 7.0.5, from 6.2.0 through 6.2.16, from 6.1.0 through 6.1.25, from 5.3.0 through 5.3.46.
|
|
CVE-2026-22735
|
Low
|
2026-03-20
|
No exploit published
|
No public exploit
|
Spring MVC and WebFlux applications are vulnerable to stream corruption when using Server-Sent Events (SSE). This issue affects Spring Foundation: from 7.0.0 through 7.0.5, from 6.2.0 through 6.2.16, from 6.1.0 through 6.1.25, from 5.3.0 through 5.3.46.
|
|
CVE-2025-41254
|
Medium
|
2025-10-16
|
No exploit published
|
No public exploit
|
STOMP over WebSocket applications may be vulnerable to a security bypass that allows an attacker to send unauthorized messages.
Affected Spring Products and VersionsSpring Framework:
* 6.2.0 - 6.2.11
* 6.1.0 - 6.1.23
* 6.0.x - 6.0.29
* 5.3.0 - 5.3.45
* Older, unsupported versions are also affected.
MitigationUsers of affected versions should upgrade to the corresponding fixed version.
Affected version(s)Fix versionAvailability6.2.x6.2.12OSS6.1.x6.1.24 Commercial https://enterprise.spring.io/ 6.0.xN/A Out of support https://spring.io/projects/spring-framework#support 5.3.x5.3.46 Commercial https://enterprise.spring.io/ No further mitigation steps are necessary.
CreditThis vulnerability was discovered and responsibly reported by Jannis Kaiser.
|
|
CVE-2025-41242
|
Medium
|
2025-08-18
|
Protected by RASP
|
Working exploit published
|
Spring Framework MVC applications can be vulnerable to a “Path Traversal Vulnerability” when deployed on a non-compliant Servlet container.
An application can be vulnerable when all the following are true:
* the application is deployed as a WAR or with an embedded Servlet container
* the Servlet container does not reject suspicious sequences https://jakarta.ee/specifications/servlet/6.1/jakarta-servlet-spec-6.1.html#uri-path-canonicalization
* the application serves static resources https://docs.spring.io/spring-framework/reference/web/webmvc/mvc-config/static-resources.html#page-title with Spring resource handling
We have verified that applications deployed on Apache Tomcat or Eclipse Jetty are not vulnerable, as long as default security features are not disabled in the configuration. Because we cannot check exploits against all Servlet containers and configuration variants, we strongly recommend upgrading your application.
|
|
CVE-2025-41234
|
Medium
|
2025-06-12
|
No exploit published
|
No public exploit
|
Description
In Spring Framework, versions 6.0.x as of 6.0.5, versions 6.1.x and 6.2.x, an application is vulnerable to a reflected file download (RFD) attack when it sets a “Content-Disposition” header with a non-ASCII charset, where the filename attribute is derived from user-supplied input.
Specifically, an application is vulnerable when all the following are true:
* The header is prepared with org.springframework.http.ContentDisposition.
* The filename is set via ContentDisposition.Builder#filename(String, Charset).
* The value for the filename is derived from user-supplied input.
* The application does not sanitize the user-supplied input.
* The downloaded content of the response is injected with malicious commands by the attacker (see RFD paper reference for details).
An application is not vulnerable if any of the following is true:
* The application does not set a “Content-Disposition” response header.
* The header is not prepared with org.springframework.http.ContentDisposition.
* The filename is set via one of: * ContentDisposition.Builder#filename(String), or
* ContentDisposition.Builder#filename(String, ASCII)
* The filename is not derived from user-supplied input.
* The filename is derived from user-supplied input but sanitized by the application.
* The attacker cannot inject malicious content in the downloaded content of the response.
Affected Spring Products and VersionsSpring Framework:
* 6.2.0 - 6.2.7
* 6.1.0 - 6.1.20
* 6.0.5 - 6.0.28
* Older, unsupported versions are not affected
MitigationUsers of affected versions should upgrade to the corresponding fixed version.
Affected version(s)Fix versionAvailability6.2.x6.2.8OSS6.1.x6.1.21OSS6.0.x6.0.29 Commercial https://enterprise.spring.io/ No further mitigation steps are necessary.
CWE-113 in `Content-Disposition` handling in VMware Spring Framework versions 6.0.5 to 6.2.7 allows remote attackers to launch Reflected File Download (RFD) attacks via unsanitized user input in `ContentDisposition.Builder#filename(String, Charset)` with non-ASCII charsets.
|
|
CVE-2024-38819
|
High
|
2024-12-19
|
Protected by RASP
|
Working exploit published
|
Applications serving static resources through the functional web frameworks WebMvc.fn or WebFlux.fn are vulnerable to path traversal attacks. An attacker can craft malicious HTTP requests and obtain any file on the file system that is also accessible to the process in which the Spring application is running.
|
|
CVE-2024-38828
|
Medium
|
2024-11-18
|
No exploit published
|
No public exploit
|
Spring MVC controller methods with an @RequestBody byte[] method parameter are vulnerable to a DoS attack.
|
|
CVE-2024-38820
|
Medium
|
2024-10-18
|
No exploit published
|
No public exploit
|
The fix for CVE-2022-22968 made disallowedFields patterns in DataBinder case insensitive. However, String.toLowerCase() has some Locale dependent exceptions that could potentially result in fields not protected as expected.
|
|
CVE-2024-38809
|
Medium
|
2024-09-27
|
Not applicable
|
No public exploit
|
Applications that parse ETags from "If-Match" or "If-None-Match" request headers are vulnerable to DoS attack.
Users of affected versions should upgrade to the corresponding fixed version.
Users of older, unsupported versions could enforce a size limit on "If-Match" and "If-None-Match" headers, e.g. through a Filter.
|
|
CVE-2024-38816
|
High
|
2024-09-13
|
Protected by RASP
|
Working exploit published
|
Applications serving static resources through the functional web frameworks WebMvc.fn or WebFlux.fn are vulnerable to path traversal attacks. An attacker can craft malicious HTTP requests and obtain any file on the file system that is also accessible to the process in which the Spring application is running.
Specifically, an application is vulnerable when both of the following are true:
* the web application uses RouterFunctions to serve static resources
* resource handling is explicitly configured with a FileSystemResource location
However, malicious requests are blocked and rejected when any of the following is true:
* the Spring Security HTTP Firewall https://docs.spring.io/spring-security/reference/servlet/exploits/firewall.html is in use
* the application runs on Tomcat or Jetty
|
|
CVE-2024-22262
|
High
|
2024-04-16
|
Protected by RASP
|
No public exploit
|
Applications that use UriComponentsBuilder to parse an externally provided URL (e.g. through a query parameter) AND perform validation checks on the host of the parsed URL may be vulnerable to a open redirect https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/601.html attack or to a SSRF attack if the URL is used after passing validation checks.
This is the same as CVE-2024-22259 https://spring.io/security/cve-2024-22259 and CVE-2024-22243 https://spring.io/security/cve-2024-22243 , but with different input.
|
|
CVE-2024-22259
|
High
|
2024-03-16
|
Protected by RASP
|
No public exploit
|
Applications that use UriComponentsBuilder in Spring Framework to parse an externally provided URL (e.g. through a query parameter) AND perform validation checks on the host of the parsed URL may be vulnerable to a open redirect https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/601.html attack or to a SSRF attack if the URL is used after passing validation checks.
This is the same as CVE-2024-22243 https://spring.io/security/cve-2024-22243 , but with different input.
|
|
CVE-2024-22243
|
High
|
2024-02-23
|
Not applicable
|
Proof of concept only
|
Applications that use UriComponentsBuilder to parse an externally provided URL (e.g. through a query parameter) AND perform validation checks on the host of the parsed URL may be vulnerable to a open redirect https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/601.html attack or to a SSRF attack if the URL is used after passing validation checks.
|
|
CVE-2023-34053
|
High
|
2023-11-28
|
Mitigated by environment configuration
|
No public exploit
|
In Spring Framework versions 6.0.0 - 6.0.13, it is possible for a user to provide specially crafted HTTP requests that may cause a denial-of-service (DoS) condition.
Specifically, an application is vulnerable when all of the following are true:
* the application uses Spring MVC or Spring WebFlux
* io.micrometer:micrometer-core is on the classpath
* an ObservationRegistry is configured in the application to record observations
Typically, Spring Boot applications need the org.springframework.boot:spring-boot-actuator dependency to meet all conditions.
|
|
CVE-2023-20860
|
High
|
2023-03-27
|
No exploit published
|
No public exploit
|
Spring Framework running version 6.0.0 - 6.0.6 or 5.3.0 - 5.3.25 using "**" as a pattern in Spring Security configuration with the mvcRequestMatcher creates a mismatch in pattern matching between Spring Security and Spring MVC, and the potential for a security bypass.
|
|
CVE-2022-22965
|
Critical
|
2022-04-01
|
Protected by RASP
|
Exploited in the wild
|
A Spring MVC or Spring WebFlux application running on JDK 9+ may be vulnerable to remote code execution (RCE) via data binding. The specific exploit requires the application to run on Tomcat as a WAR deployment. If the application is deployed as a Spring Boot executable jar, i.e. the default, it is not vulnerable to the exploit. However, the nature of the vulnerability is more general, and there may be other ways to exploit it.
|
|
CVE-2021-22118
|
High
|
2021-05-27
|
Protected by RASP
|
No public exploit
|
In Spring Framework, versions 5.2.x prior to 5.2.15 and versions 5.3.x prior to 5.3.7, a WebFlux application is vulnerable to a privilege escalation: by (re)creating the temporary storage directory, a locally authenticated malicious user can read or modify files that have been uploaded to the WebFlux application, or overwrite arbitrary files with multipart request data.
|
|
CVE-2020-5398
|
High
|
2020-01-17
|
Out of RASP scope
|
Proof of concept only
|
In Spring Framework, versions 5.2.x prior to 5.2.3, versions 5.1.x prior to 5.1.13, and versions 5.0.x prior to 5.0.16, an application is vulnerable to a reflected file download (RFD) attack when it sets a "Content-Disposition" header in the response where the filename attribute is derived from user supplied input.
|
|
CVE-2020-5397
|
Medium
|
2020-01-17
|
Protected by RASP
|
No public exploit
|
Spring Framework, versions 5.2.x prior to 5.2.3 are vulnerable to CSRF attacks through CORS preflight requests that target Spring MVC (spring-webmvc module) or Spring WebFlux (spring-webflux module) endpoints. Only non-authenticated endpoints are vulnerable because preflight requests should not include credentials and therefore requests should fail authentication. However a notable exception to this are Chrome based browsers when using client certificates for authentication since Chrome sends TLS client certificates in CORS preflight requests in violation of spec requirements. No HTTP body can be sent or received as a result of this attack.
|
|
CVE-2013-6430
|
Medium
|
2020-01-10
|
Out of RASP scope
|
No public exploit
|
The JavaScriptUtils.javaScriptEscape method in web/util/JavaScriptUtils.java in Spring MVC in Spring Framework before 3.2.2 does not properly escape certain characters, which allows remote attackers to conduct cross-site scripting (XSS) attacks via a (1) line separator or (2) paragraph separator Unicode character or (3) left or (4) right angle bracket.
|
|
CVE-2016-1000027
|
Critical
|
2020-01-02
|
Protected by RASP
|
Proof of concept only
|
Pivotal Spring Framework through 5.3.16 suffers from a potential remote code execution (RCE) issue if used for Java deserialization of untrusted data. Depending on how the library is implemented within a product, this issue may or not occur, and authentication may be required. NOTE: the vendor's position is that untrusted data is not an intended use case. The product's behavior will not be changed because some users rely on deserialization of trusted data.
|
|
CVE-2018-11039
|
Medium
|
2018-06-25
|
No fix identified
|
No public exploit
|
Spring Framework (versions 5.0.x prior to 5.0.7, versions 4.3.x prior to 4.3.18, and older unsupported versions) allow web applications to change the HTTP request method to any HTTP method (including TRACE) using the HiddenHttpMethodFilter in Spring MVC. If an application has a pre-existing XSS vulnerability, a malicious user (or attacker) can use this filter to escalate to an XST (Cross Site Tracing) attack.
|
|
CVE-2014-0225
|
High
|
2017-05-25
|
Protected by RASP
|
No public exploit
|
When processing user provided XML documents, the Spring Framework 4.0.0 to 4.0.4, 3.0.0 to 3.2.8, and possibly earlier unsupported versions did not disable by default the resolution of URI references in a DTD declaration. This enabled an XXE attack.
|
|
CVE-2016-9878
|
High
|
2016-12-29
|
Protected by RASP
|
No public exploit
|
An issue was discovered in Pivotal Spring Framework before 3.2.18, 4.2.x before 4.2.9, and 4.3.x before 4.3.5. Paths provided to the ResourceServlet were not properly sanitized and as a result exposed to directory traversal attacks.
|
|
CVE-2015-3192
|
Medium
|
2016-07-12
|
Protected by RASP
|
No public exploit
|
Pivotal Spring Framework before 3.2.14 and 4.x before 4.1.7 do not properly process inline DTD declarations when DTD is not entirely disabled, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption and out-of-memory errors) via a crafted XML file.
|
|
CVE-2014-3625
|
Medium
|
2014-11-20
|
Protected by RASP
|
Proof of concept only
|
Directory traversal vulnerability in Pivotal Spring Framework 3.0.4 through 3.2.x before 3.2.12, 4.0.x before 4.0.8, and 4.1.x before 4.1.2 allows remote attackers to read arbitrary files via unspecified vectors, related to static resource handling.
|
|
CVE-2014-0054
|
Medium
|
2014-04-17
|
Protected by RASP
|
Forecast only
|
The Jaxb2RootElementHttpMessageConverter in Spring MVC in Spring Framework before 3.2.8 and 4.0.0 before 4.0.2 does not disable external entity resolution, which allows remote attackers to read arbitrary files, cause a denial of service, and conduct CSRF attacks via crafted XML, aka an XML External Entity (XXE) issue. NOTE: this vulnerability exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2013-4152, CVE-2013-7315, and CVE-2013-6429.
|
|
CVE-2014-1904
|
Medium
|
2014-03-20
|
No exploit published
|
No public exploit
|
Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in web/servlet/tags/form/FormTag.java in Spring MVC in Spring Framework 3.0.0 before 3.2.8 and 4.0.0 before 4.0.2 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the requested URI in a default action.
|
|
CVE-2013-6429
|
Medium
|
2014-01-26
|
Protected by RASP
|
Forecast only
|
The SourceHttpMessageConverter in Spring MVC in Spring Framework before 3.2.5 and 4.0.0.M1 through 4.0.0.RC1 does not disable external entity resolution, which allows remote attackers to read arbitrary files, cause a denial of service, and conduct CSRF attacks via crafted XML, aka an XML External Entity (XXE) issue, and a different vulnerability than CVE-2013-4152 and CVE-2013-7315.
|