WaratekVRT Sign in

High Spring CVEs

131 CVEs, 4 exploited, 21 protected by Waratek

Reset
More filters (1)
Columns
Product: Spring✕
Overview 131 matches · 21 protected · 4 exploited · 1 CISA KEV · 7 public PoC · 3 EPSS ≥ 0.5
131matches 21protected16.0% 4exploited3.1% 1CISA KEV0.8% 7public PoC5.3% 3EPSS ≥ 0.52.3%
Protected by Waratek 21 16.0% Rule in development 0 0.0% Mitigation candidate 3 2.3% No exploit published 107 81.7%
Critical 0 0.0% High 131 100.0% Medium 0 0.0% Low 0 0.0% None 0 0.0% Unknown 0 0.0%
blocked by ARMR today 21 16.0% partly blocked 0 0.0% not blocked 110 84.0% not established 0 0.0% unrecorded 0 0.0%
Exploited 4 3.1% Working exploit published 2 1.5% Proof of concept only 1 0.8% Forecast only 0 0.0% No public exploit 124 94.7%
split by peak 76 / year
No exploit published: 107Mitigation candidate: 3Protected by Waratek: 21 High: 131 not blocked: 110blocked by ARMR today: 21 No public exploit: 124Proof of concept only: 1Working exploit published: 2Exploited: 4
20121 No exploit published1 High1 not blocked1 No public exploit1 20130 20140 20150 20161 Protected by Waratek1 High1 blocked by ARMR today1 No public exploit1 20179 Protected by Waratek1 Mitigation candidate1 No exploit published7 High9 blocked by ARMR today1 not blocked8 Exploited1 No public exploit8 201810 Protected by Waratek3 No exploit published7 High10 blocked by ARMR today3 not blocked7 No public exploit10 20191 No exploit published1 High1 not blocked1 No public exploit1 20203 Protected by Waratek1 No exploit published2 High3 blocked by ARMR today1 not blocked2 Exploited1 No public exploit2 20216 Protected by Waratek2 Mitigation candidate1 No exploit published3 High6 blocked by ARMR today2 not blocked4 Exploited1 No public exploit5 20223 No exploit published3 High3 not blocked3 No public exploit3 20236 Protected by Waratek1 No exploit published5 High6 blocked by ARMR today1 not blocked5 Proof of concept only1 No public exploit5 20249 Protected by Waratek4 No exploit published5 High9 blocked by ARMR today4 not blocked5 Exploited1 Working exploit published1 No public exploit7 20256 No exploit published6 High6 not blocked6 No public exploit6 202676 Protected by Waratek8 Mitigation candidate1 No exploit published67 High76 blocked by ARMR today8 not blocked68 Working exploit published1 No public exploit75
20122014201620182020202220242026
131 matches Sign in to download these CVEs as CSV or JSON, or to follow them in a feed. ‹ prev page 2 of 2 next ›
CVE Severity Published▾ Status Exploitation Description
CVE-2021-22053 High 2021-11-19 Mitigation candidate Exploited Applications using both `spring-cloud-netflix-hystrix-dashboard` and `spring-boot-starter-thymeleaf` expose a way to execute code submitted within the request URI path during the resolution of view templates. When a request is made at `/hystrix/monitor;[user-provided data]`, the path elements following `hystrix/monitor` are being evaluated as SpringEL expressions, which can lead to code execution.
CVE-2021-22044 High 2021-10-28 No exploit published No public exploit In Spring Cloud OpenFeign 3.0.0 to 3.0.4, 2.2.0.RELEASE to 2.2.9.RELEASE, and older unsupported versions, applications using type-level `@RequestMapping`annotations over Feign client interfaces, can be involuntarily exposing endpoints corresponding to `@RequestMapping`-annotated interface methods.
CVE-2021-22119 High 2021-06-29 No exploit published No public exploit Spring Security versions 5.5.x prior to 5.5.1, 5.4.x prior to 5.4.7, 5.3.x prior to 5.3.10 and 5.2.x prior to 5.2.11 are susceptible to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) attack via the initiation of the Authorization Request in an OAuth 2.0 Client Web and WebFlux application. A malicious user or attacker can send multiple requests initiating the Authorization Request for the Authorization Code Grant, which has the potential of exhausting system resources using a single session or multiple sessions.
CVE-2021-22118 High 2021-05-27 Protected by Waratek 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-2021-22112 High 2021-02-23 No exploit published No public exploit Spring Security 5.4.x prior to 5.4.4, 5.3.x prior to 5.3.8.RELEASE, 5.2.x prior to 5.2.9.RELEASE, and older unsupported versions can fail to save the SecurityContext if it is changed more than once in a single request.A malicious user cannot cause the bug to happen (it must be programmed in). However, if the application's intent is to only allow the user to run with elevated privileges in a small portion of the application, the bug can be leveraged to extend those privileges to the rest of the application.
CVE-2020-5427 High 2021-01-27 Protected by Waratek No public exploit In Spring Cloud Data Flow, versions 2.6.x prior to 2.6.5, versions 2.5.x prior 2.5.4, an application is vulnerable to SQL injection when requesting task execution.
CVE-2020-5411 High 2020-06-11 No exploit published No public exploit When configured to enable default typing, Jackson contained a deserialization vulnerability that could lead to arbitrary code execution. Jackson fixed this vulnerability by blacklisting known "deserialization gadgets". Spring Batch configures Jackson with global default typing enabled which means that through the previous exploit, arbitrary code could be executed if all of the following is true: * Spring Batch's Jackson support is being leveraged to serialize a job's ExecutionContext. * A malicious user gains write access to the data store used by the JobRepository (where the data to be deserialized is stored). In order to protect against this type of attack, Jackson prevents a set of untrusted gadget classes from being deserialized. Spring Batch should be proactive against blocking unknown "deserialization gadgets" when enabling default typing.
CVE-2020-5410 High 2020-06-02 Protected by Waratek Exploited Spring Cloud Config, versions 2.2.x prior to 2.2.3, versions 2.1.x prior to 2.1.9, and older unsupported versions allow applications to serve arbitrary configuration files through the spring-cloud-config-server module. A malicious user, or attacker, can send a request using a specially crafted URL that can lead to a directory traversal attack.
CVE-2020-5407 High 2020-05-13 No exploit published No public exploit Spring Security versions 5.2.x prior to 5.2.4 and 5.3.x prior to 5.3.2 contain a signature wrapping vulnerability during SAML response validation. When using the spring-security-saml2-service-provider component, a malicious user can carefully modify an otherwise valid SAML response and append an arbitrary assertion that Spring Security will accept as valid.
CVE-2019-11272 High 2019-06-26 No exploit published No public exploit Spring Security, versions 4.2.x up to 4.2.12, and older unsupported versions support plain text passwords using PlaintextPasswordEncoder. If an application using an affected version of Spring Security is leveraging PlaintextPasswordEncoder and a user has a null encoded password, a malicious user (or attacker) can authenticate using a password of "null".
CVE-2018-15801 High 2018-12-19 No exploit published No public exploit Spring Security versions 5.1.x prior to 5.1.2 contain an authorization bypass vulnerability during JWT issuer validation. In order to be impacted, the same private key for an honest issuer and a malicious user must be used when signing JWTs. In that case, a malicious user could fashion signed JWTs with the malicious issuer URL that may be granted for the honest issuer.
CVE-2018-15795 High 2018-11-13 No exploit published No public exploit Pivotal CredHub Service Broker, versions prior to 1.1.0, uses a guessable form of random number generation in creating service broker's UAA client. A remote malicious user may guess the client secret and obtain or modify credentials for users of the CredHub Service.
CVE-2018-11040 High 2018-06-25 No exploit published No public exploit Spring Framework, versions 5.0.x prior to 5.0.7 and 4.3.x prior to 4.3.18 and older unsupported versions, allows web applications to enable cross-domain requests via JSONP (JSON with Padding) through AbstractJsonpResponseBodyAdvice for REST controllers and MappingJackson2JsonView for browser requests. Both are not enabled by default in Spring Framework nor Spring Boot, however, when MappingJackson2JsonView is configured in an application, JSONP support is automatically ready to use through the "jsonp" and "callback" JSONP parameters, enabling cross-domain requests.
CVE-2017-3203 High 2018-06-11 Protected by Waratek No public exploit The Java implementations of AMF3 deserializers in Pivotal/Spring Spring-flex derive class instances from java.io.Externalizable rather than the AMF3 specification's recommendation of flash.utils.IExternalizable. A remote attacker with the ability to spoof or control an RMI server connection may be able to send serialized Java objects that execute arbitrary code when deserialized.
CVE-2018-1259 High 2018-05-11 Protected by Waratek No public exploit Spring Data Commons, versions 1.13 prior to 1.13.12 and 2.0 prior to 2.0.7, used in combination with XMLBeam 1.4.14 or earlier versions, contains a property binder vulnerability caused by improper restriction of XML external entity references as underlying library XMLBeam does not restrict external reference expansion. An unauthenticated remote malicious user can supply specially crafted request parameters against Spring Data's projection-based request payload binding to access arbitrary files on the system.
CVE-2018-1258 High 2018-05-11 No exploit published No public exploit Spring Framework version 5.0.5 when used in combination with any versions of Spring Security contains an authorization bypass when using method security. An unauthorized malicious user can gain unauthorized access to methods that should be restricted.
CVE-2018-1256 High 2018-05-07 No exploit published No public exploit Spring Cloud SSO Connector, version 2.1.2, contains a regression which disables issuer validation in resource servers that are not bound to the SSO service. In PCF deployments with multiple SSO service plans, a remote attacker can authenticate to unbound resource servers which use this version of the SSO Connector with tokens generated from another service plan.
CVE-2018-1274 High 2018-04-18 No exploit published No public exploit Spring Data Commons, versions 1.13 to 1.13.10, 2.0 to 2.0.5, and older unsupported versions, contain a property path parser vulnerability caused by unlimited resource allocation. An unauthenticated remote malicious user (or attacker) can issue requests against Spring Data REST endpoints or endpoints using property path parsing which can cause a denial of service (CPU and memory consumption).
CVE-2018-1272 High 2018-04-06 Protected by Waratek No public exploit Spring Framework, versions 5.0 prior to 5.0.5 and versions 4.3 prior to 4.3.15 and older unsupported versions, provide client-side support for multipart requests. When Spring MVC or Spring WebFlux server application (server A) receives input from a remote client, and then uses that input to make a multipart request to another server (server B), it can be exposed to an attack, where an extra multipart is inserted in the content of the request from server A, causing server B to use the wrong value for a part it expects. This could to lead privilege escalation, for example, if the part content represents a username or user roles.
CVE-2018-1230 High 2018-03-21 No exploit published No public exploit Pivotal Spring Batch Admin, all versions, does not contain cross site request forgery protection. A remote unauthenticated user could craft a malicious site that executes requests to Spring Batch Admin. This issue has not been patched because Spring Batch Admin has reached end of life.
CVE-2017-8028 High 2017-11-27 No exploit published No public exploit In Pivotal Spring-LDAP versions 1.3.0 - 2.3.1, when connected to some LDAP servers, when no additional attributes are bound, and when using LDAP BindAuthenticator with org.springframework.ldap.core.support.DefaultTlsDirContextAuthenticationStrategy as the authentication strategy, and setting userSearch, authentication is allowed with an arbitrary password when the username is correct. This occurs because some LDAP vendors require an explicit operation for the LDAP bind to take effect.
CVE-2017-4995 High 2017-11-27 No exploit published No public exploit An issue was discovered in Pivotal Spring Security 4.2.0.RELEASE through 4.2.2.RELEASE, and Spring Security 5.0.0.M1. When configured to enable default typing, Jackson contained a deserialization vulnerability that could lead to arbitrary code execution. Jackson fixed this vulnerability by blacklisting known "deserialization gadgets." Spring Security configures Jackson with global default typing enabled, which means that (through the previous exploit) arbitrary code could be executed if all of the following is true: (1) Spring Security's Jackson support is being leveraged by invoking SecurityJackson2Modules.getModules(ClassLoader) or SecurityJackson2Modules.enableDefaultTyping(ObjectMapper); (2) Jackson is used to deserialize data that is not trusted (Spring Security does not perform deserialization using Jackson, so this is an explicit choice of the user); and (3) there is an unknown (Jackson is not blacklisting it already) "deserialization gadget" that allows code execution present on the classpath. Jackson provides a blacklisting approach to protecting against this type of attack, but Spring Security should be proactive against blocking unknown "deserialization gadgets" when Spring Security enables default typing.
CVE-2015-5258 High 2017-08-22 No exploit published No public exploit Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in springframework-social before 1.1.3.
CVE-2017-12881 High 2017-08-18 No exploit published No public exploit Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in the Spring Batch Admin before 1.3.0 allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of unspecified victims and submit arbitrary requests, such as exploiting the file upload vulnerability.
CVE-2016-5007 High 2017-05-25 No exploit published No public exploit Both Spring Security 3.2.x, 4.0.x, 4.1.0 and the Spring Framework 3.2.x, 4.0.x, 4.1.x, 4.2.x rely on URL pattern mappings for authorization and for mapping requests to controllers respectively. Differences in the strictness of the pattern matching mechanisms, for example with regards to space trimming in path segments, can lead Spring Security to not recognize certain paths as not protected that are in fact mapped to Spring MVC controllers that should be protected. The problem is compounded by the fact that the Spring Framework provides richer features with regards to pattern matching as well as by the fact that pattern matching in each Spring Security and the Spring Framework can easily be customized creating additional differences.
CVE-2016-4977 High 2017-05-25 Mitigation candidate Exploited When processing authorization requests using the whitelabel views in Spring Security OAuth 2.0.0 to 2.0.9 and 1.0.0 to 1.0.5, the response_type parameter value was executed as Spring SpEL which enabled a malicious user to trigger remote code execution via the crafting of the value for response_type.
CVE-2014-0225 High 2017-05-25 Protected by Waratek 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-2014-0097 High 2017-05-25 No exploit published No public exploit The ActiveDirectoryLdapAuthenticator in Spring Security 3.2.0 to 3.2.1 and 3.1.0 to 3.1.5 does not check the password length. If the directory allows anonymous binds then it may incorrectly authenticate a user who supplies an empty password.
CVE-2016-9879 High 2017-01-06 No exploit published No public exploit An issue was discovered in Pivotal Spring Security before 3.2.10, 4.1.x before 4.1.4, and 4.2.x before 4.2.1. Spring Security does not consider URL path parameters when processing security constraints. By adding a URL path parameter with an encoded "/" to a request, an attacker may be able to bypass a security constraint. The root cause of this issue is a lack of clarity regarding the handling of path parameters in the Servlet Specification. Some Servlet containers include path parameters in the value returned for getPathInfo() and some do not. Spring Security uses the value returned by getPathInfo() as part of the process of mapping requests to security constraints. The unexpected presence of path parameters can cause a constraint to be bypassed. Users of Apache Tomcat (all current versions) are not affected by this vulnerability since Tomcat follows the guidance previously provided by the Servlet Expert group and strips path parameters from the value returned by getContextPath(), getServletPath(), and getPathInfo(). Users of other Servlet containers based on Apache Tomcat may or may not be affected depending on whether or not the handling of path parameters has been modified. Users of IBM WebSphere Application Server 8.5.x are known to be affected. Users of other containers that implement the Servlet specification may be affected.
CVE-2016-9878 High 2016-12-29 Protected by Waratek 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-2011-2730 High 2012-12-05 No exploit published No public exploit VMware SpringSource Spring Framework before 2.5.6.SEC03, 2.5.7.SR023, and 3.x before 3.0.6, when a container supports Expression Language (EL), evaluates EL expressions in tags twice, which allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive information via a (1) name attribute in a (a) spring:hasBindErrors tag; (2) path attribute in a (b) spring:bind or (c) spring:nestedpath tag; (3) arguments, (4) code, (5) text, (6) var, (7) scope, or (8) message attribute in a (d) spring:message or (e) spring:theme tag; or (9) var, (10) scope, or (11) value attribute in a (f) spring:transform tag, aka "Expression Language Injection."
‹ prev page 2 of 2 next ›