Overview 263 matches · 0 protected · 0 exploited · 0 CISA KEV · 0 public PoC · 0 EPSS ≥ 0.5
263matches
0protected0.0%
0exploited0.0%
0CISA KEV0.0%
0public PoC0.0%
0EPSS ≥ 0.50.0%
Protected by Waratek
0
0.0%
Rule in development
0
0.0%
Mitigation candidate
0
0.0%
No exploit published
263
100.0%
blocked by ARMR today
0
0.0%
partly blocked
0
0.0%
not blocked
263
100.0%
not established
0
0.0%
unrecorded
0
0.0%
Exploited
0
0.0%
Working exploit published
0
0.0%
Proof of concept only
0
0.0%
Forecast only
0
0.0%
No public exploit
263
100.0%
split by
peak 169 / year
20091
No exploit published1
Medium1
not blocked1
No public exploit1
20101
No exploit published1
Medium1
not blocked1
No public exploit1
20110
20123
No exploit published3
High1
Medium2
not blocked3
No public exploit3
20130
20141
No exploit published1
Medium1
not blocked1
No public exploit1
20150
20160
201712
No exploit published12
Critical2
High7
Medium3
not blocked12
No public exploit12
201813
No exploit published13
Critical1
High7
Medium5
not blocked13
No public exploit13
20193
No exploit published3
High1
Medium2
not blocked3
No public exploit3
20205
No exploit published5
Critical1
High2
Medium2
not blocked5
No public exploit5
20217
No exploit published7
High3
Medium4
not blocked7
No public exploit7
202210
No exploit published10
High3
Medium6
Low1
not blocked10
No public exploit10
202315
No exploit published15
Critical2
High5
Medium8
not blocked15
No public exploit15
202412
No exploit published12
Critical1
High5
Medium5
Low1
not blocked12
No public exploit12
202511
No exploit published11
Critical1
High6
Medium3
Low1
not blocked11
No public exploit11
2026169
No exploit published169
Critical14
High67
Medium75
Low13
not blocked169
No public exploit169
201020122014201620182020202220242026
| CVE | Severity | Published▾ | Status | Exploitation | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2023-20862 | Medium | 2023-04-19 | No exploit published | No public exploit | In Spring Security, versions 5.7.x prior to 5.7.8, versions 5.8.x prior to 5.8.3, and versions 6.0.x prior to 6.0.3, the logout support does not properly clean the security context if using serialized versions. Additionally, it is not possible to explicitly save an empty security context to the HttpSessionSecurityContextRepository. This vulnerability can keep users authenticated even after they performed logout. Users of affected versions should apply the following mitigation. 5.7.x users should upgrade to 5.7.8. 5.8.x users should upgrade to 5.8.3. 6.0.x users should upgrade to 6.0.3. |
| CVE-2023-20866 | Medium | 2023-04-13 | No exploit published | No public exploit | In Spring Session version 3.0.0, the session id can be logged to the standard output stream. This vulnerability exposes sensitive information to those who have access to the application logs and can be used for session hijacking. Specifically, an application is vulnerable if it is using HeaderHttpSessionIdResolver. |
| CVE-2023-20863 | Medium | 2023-04-13 | No exploit published | No public exploit | In spring framework versions prior to 5.2.24 release+ ,5.3.27+ and 6.0.8+ , it is possible for a user to provide a specially crafted SpEL expression that may cause a denial-of-service (DoS) condition. |
| 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-2023-20861 | Medium | 2023-03-23 | No exploit published | No public exploit | In Spring Framework versions 6.0.0 - 6.0.6, 5.3.0 - 5.3.25, 5.2.0.RELEASE - 5.2.22.RELEASE, and older unsupported versions, it is possible for a user to provide a specially crafted SpEL expression that may cause a denial-of-service (DoS) condition. |
| CVE-2023-20859 | Medium | 2023-03-23 | No exploit published | No public exploit | In Spring Vault, versions 3.0.x prior to 3.0.2 and versions 2.3.x prior to 2.3.3 and older versions, an application is vulnerable to insertion of sensitive information into a log file when it attempts to revoke a Vault batch token. |
| CVE-2023-22602 | High | 2023-01-14 | No exploit published | No public exploit | When using Apache Shiro before 1.11.0 together with Spring Boot 2.6+, a specially crafted HTTP request may cause an authentication bypass. The authentication bypass occurs when Shiro and Spring Boot are using different pattern-matching techniques. Both Shiro and Spring Boot < 2.6 default to Ant style pattern matching. Mitigation: Update to Apache Shiro 1.11.0, or set the following Spring Boot configuration value: `spring.mvc.pathmatch.matching-strategy = ant_path_matcher` |
| CVE-2022-31690 | High | 2022-10-31 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Spring Security, versions 5.7 prior to 5.7.5, and 5.6 prior to 5.6.9, and older unsupported versions could be susceptible to a privilege escalation under certain conditions. A malicious user or attacker can modify a request initiated by the Client (via the browser) to the Authorization Server which can lead to a privilege escalation on the subsequent approval. This scenario can happen if the Authorization Server responds with an OAuth2 Access Token Response containing an empty scope list (per RFC 6749, Section 5.1) on the subsequent request to the token endpoint to obtain the access token. |
| CVE-2022-31679 | Low | 2022-09-21 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Applications that allow HTTP PATCH access to resources exposed by Spring Data REST in versions 3.6.0 - 3.5.5, 3.7.0 - 3.7.2, and older unsupported versions, if an attacker knows about the structure of the underlying domain model, they can craft HTTP requests that expose hidden entity attributes. |
| CVE-2022-22979 | High | 2022-06-21 | No exploit published | No public exploit | In Spring Cloud Function versions prior to 3.2.6, it is possible for a user who directly interacts with framework provided lookup functionality to cause a denial-of-service condition due to the caching issue in the Function Catalog component of the framework. |
| CVE-2022-22976 | Medium | 2022-05-19 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Spring Security versions 5.5.x prior to 5.5.7, 5.6.x prior to 5.6.4, and earlier unsupported versions contain an integer overflow vulnerability. When using the BCrypt class with the maximum work factor (31), the encoder does not perform any salt rounds, due to an integer overflow error. The default settings are not affected by this CVE. |
| CVE-2022-22970 | Medium | 2022-05-12 | No exploit published | No public exploit | In spring framework versions prior to 5.3.20+ , 5.2.22+ and old unsupported versions, applications that handle file uploads are vulnerable to DoS attack if they rely on data binding to set a MultipartFile or javax.servlet.Part to a field in a model object. |
| CVE-2022-22969 | Medium | 2022-04-21 | No exploit published | No public exploit | <Issue Description> Spring Security OAuth versions 2.5.x prior to 2.5.2 and older unsupported versions are susceptible to a Denial-of-Service (DoS) attack via the initiation of the Authorization Request in an OAuth 2.0 Client 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. This vulnerability exposes OAuth 2.0 Client applications only. |
| CVE-2022-22968 | Medium | 2022-04-14 | No exploit published | No public exploit | In Spring Framework versions 5.3.0 - 5.3.18, 5.2.0 - 5.2.20, and older unsupported versions, the patterns for disallowedFields on a DataBinder are case sensitive which means a field is not effectively protected unless it is listed with both upper and lower case for the first character of the field, including upper and lower case for the first character of all nested fields within the property path. |
| CVE-2022-27772 | High | 2022-03-30 | No exploit published | No public exploit | spring-boot versions prior to version v2.2.11.RELEASE was vulnerable to temporary directory hijacking. This vulnerability impacted the org.springframework.boot.web.server.AbstractConfigurableWebServerFactory.createTempDir method. NOTE: This vulnerability only affects products and/or versions that are no longer supported by the maintainer |
| CVE-2022-22946 | Medium | 2022-03-04 | No exploit published | No public exploit | In spring cloud gateway versions prior to 3.1.1+ , applications that are configured to enable HTTP2 and no key store or trusted certificates are set will be configured to use an insecure TrustManager. This makes the gateway able to connect to remote services with invalid or custom certificates. |
| CVE-2021-22060 | Medium | 2022-01-10 | No exploit published | No public exploit | In Spring Framework versions 5.3.0 - 5.3.13, 5.2.0 - 5.2.18, and older unsupported versions, it is possible for a user to provide malicious input to cause the insertion of additional log entries. This is a follow-up to CVE-2021-22096 that protects against additional types of input and in more places of the Spring Framework codebase. |
| CVE-2021-22051 | Medium | 2021-11-08 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Applications using Spring Cloud Gateway are vulnerable to specifically crafted requests that could make an extra request on downstream services. Users of affected versions should apply the following mitigation: 3.0.x users should upgrade to 3.0.5+, 2.2.x users should upgrade to 2.2.10.RELEASE or newer. |
| CVE-2021-22096 | Medium | 2021-10-28 | No exploit published | No public exploit | In Spring Framework versions 5.3.0 - 5.3.10, 5.2.0 - 5.2.17, and older unsupported versions, it is possible for a user to provide malicious input to cause the insertion of additional log entries. |
| CVE-2021-22047 | Medium | 2021-10-28 | No exploit published | No public exploit | In Spring Data REST versions 3.4.0 - 3.4.13, 3.5.0 - 3.5.5, and older unsupported versions, HTTP resources implemented by custom controllers using a configured base API path and a controller type-level request mapping are additionally exposed under URIs that can potentially be exposed for unauthorized access depending on the Spring Security configuration. |
| 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-2021-22113 | Medium | 2021-02-23 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Applications using the “Sensitive Headers” functionality in Spring Cloud Netflix Zuul 2.2.6.RELEASE and below may be vulnerable to bypassing the “Sensitive Headers” restriction when executing requests with specially constructed URLs. Applications that use Spring Security's StrictHttpFirewall (enabled by default for all URLs) are not affected by the vulnerability, as they reject requests that allow bypassing. |
| 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-2020-5421 | Medium | 2020-09-19 | No exploit published | No public exploit | In Spring Framework versions 5.2.0 - 5.2.8, 5.1.0 - 5.1.17, 5.0.0 - 5.0.18, 4.3.0 - 4.3.28, and older unsupported versions, the protections against RFD attacks from CVE-2015-5211 may be bypassed depending on the browser used through the use of a jsessionid path parameter. |
| CVE-2020-5413 | Critical | 2020-07-31 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Spring Integration framework provides Kryo Codec implementations as an alternative for Java (de)serialization. When Kryo is configured with default options, all unregistered classes are resolved on demand. This leads to the "deserialization gadgets" exploit when provided data contains malicious code for execution during deserialization. In order to protect against this type of attack, Kryo can be configured to require a set of trusted classes for (de)serialization. Spring Integration should be proactive against blocking unknown "deserialization gadgets" when configuring Kryo in code. |
| 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-2020-5408 | Medium | 2020-05-14 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Spring Security versions 5.3.x prior to 5.3.2, 5.2.x prior to 5.2.4, 5.1.x prior to 5.1.10, 5.0.x prior to 5.0.16 and 4.2.x prior to 4.2.16 use a fixed null initialization vector with CBC Mode in the implementation of the queryable text encryptor. A malicious user with access to the data that has been encrypted using such an encryptor may be able to derive the unencrypted values using a dictionary 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-2019-3802 | Medium | 2019-06-03 | No exploit published | No public exploit | This affects Spring Data JPA in versions up to and including 2.1.6, 2.0.14 and 1.11.20. ExampleMatcher using ExampleMatcher.StringMatcher.STARTING, ExampleMatcher.StringMatcher.ENDING or ExampleMatcher.StringMatcher.CONTAINING could return more results than anticipated when a maliciously crafted example value is supplied. |
| CVE-2019-3795 | Medium | 2019-04-09 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Spring Security versions 4.2.x prior to 4.2.12, 5.0.x prior to 5.0.12, and 5.1.x prior to 5.1.5 contain an insecure randomness vulnerability when using SecureRandomFactoryBean#setSeed to configure a SecureRandom instance. In order to be impacted, an honest application must provide a seed and make the resulting random material available to an attacker for inspection. |
| 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-2018-15758 | Critical | 2018-10-18 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Spring Security OAuth, versions 2.3 prior to 2.3.4, and 2.2 prior to 2.2.3, and 2.1 prior to 2.1.3, and 2.0 prior to 2.0.16, and older unsupported versions could be susceptible to a privilege escalation under certain conditions. A malicious user or attacker can craft a request to the approval endpoint that can modify the previously saved authorization request and lead to a privilege escalation on the subsequent approval. This scenario can happen if the application is configured to use a custom approval endpoint that declares AuthorizationRequest as a controller method argument. This vulnerability exposes applications that meet all of the following requirements: Act in the role of an Authorization Server (e.g. @EnableAuthorizationServer) and use a custom Approval Endpoint that declares AuthorizationRequest as a controller method argument. This vulnerability does not expose applications that: Act in the role of an Authorization Server and use the default Approval Endpoint, act in the role of a Resource Server only (e.g. @EnableResourceServer), act in the role of a Client only (e.g. @EnableOAuthClient). |
| CVE-2018-11087 | Medium | 2018-09-14 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Pivotal Spring AMQP, 1.x versions prior to 1.7.10 and 2.x versions prior to 2.0.6, expose a man-in-the-middle vulnerability due to lack of hostname validation. A malicious user that has the ability to intercept traffic would be able to view data in transit. |
| 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-2018-11039 | Medium | 2018-06-25 | No exploit published | 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-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-2018-1257 | Medium | 2018-05-11 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Spring Framework, versions 5.0.x prior to 5.0.6, versions 4.3.x prior to 4.3.17, and older unsupported versions allows applications to expose STOMP over WebSocket endpoints with a simple, in-memory STOMP broker through the spring-messaging module. A malicious user (or attacker) can craft a message to the broker that can lead to a regular expression, denial of service attack. |
| 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-2018-1230 | 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-2018-1229 | Medium | 2018-03-21 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Pivotal Spring Batch Admin, all versions, contains a stored XSS vulnerability in the file upload feature. An unauthenticated malicious user with network access to Spring Batch Admin could store an arbitrary web script that would be executed by other users. This issue has not been patched because Spring Batch Admin has reached end of life. |
| CVE-2018-1199 | Medium | 2018-03-16 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Spring Security (Spring Security 4.1.x before 4.1.5, 4.2.x before 4.2.4, and 5.0.x before 5.0.1; and Spring Framework 4.3.x before 4.3.14 and 5.0.x before 5.0.3) does not consider URL path parameters when processing security constraints. By adding a URL path parameter with special encodings, 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. In this particular attack, different character encodings used in path parameters allows secured Spring MVC static resource URLs to be bypassed. |
| CVE-2017-8039 | Medium | 2017-11-27 | No exploit published | No public exploit | An issue was discovered in Pivotal Spring Web Flow through 2.4.5. Applications that do not change the value of the MvcViewFactoryCreator useSpringBinding property which is disabled by default (i.e., set to 'false') can be vulnerable to malicious EL expressions in view states that process form submissions but do not have a sub-element to declare explicit data binding property mappings. NOTE: this issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2017-4971. |
| 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-2017-12882 | Medium | 2017-08-18 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Stored Cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Spring Batch Admin before 1.3.0 allows remote authenticated users to inject arbitrary JavaScript or HTML via the file upload functionality. |
| 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-2017-4971 | Medium | 2017-06-13 | No exploit published | No public exploit | An issue was discovered in Pivotal Spring Web Flow through 2.4.4. Applications that do not change the value of the MvcViewFactoryCreator useSpringBinding property which is disabled by default (i.e., set to 'false') can be vulnerable to malicious EL expressions in view states that process form submissions but do not have a sub-element to declare explicit data binding property mappings. |
| 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-2015-5211 | Critical | 2017-05-25 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Under some situations, the Spring Framework 4.2.0 to 4.2.1, 4.0.0 to 4.1.7, 3.2.0 to 3.2.14 and older unsupported versions is vulnerable to a Reflected File Download (RFD) attack. The attack involves a malicious user crafting a URL with a batch script extension that results in the response being downloaded rather than rendered and also includes some input reflected in the response. |
| CVE-2014-3527 | Critical | 2017-05-25 | No exploit published | No public exploit | When using the CAS Proxy ticket authentication from Spring Security 3.1 to 3.2.4 a malicious CAS Service could trick another CAS Service into authenticating a proxy ticket that was not associated. This is due to the fact that the proxy ticket authentication uses the information from the HttpServletRequest which is populated based upon untrusted information within the HTTP request. This means if there are access control restrictions on which CAS services can authenticate to one another, those restrictions can be bypassed. If users are not using CAS Proxy tickets and not basing access control decisions based upon the CAS Service, then there is no impact to users. |
| 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-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-2012-5055 | Medium | 2012-12-05 | No exploit published | No public exploit | DaoAuthenticationProvider in VMware SpringSource Spring Security before 2.0.8, 3.0.x before 3.0.8, and 3.1.x before 3.1.3 does not check the password if the user is not found, which makes the response delay shorter and might allow remote attackers to enumerate valid usernames via a series of login requests. |
| CVE-2011-2731 | Medium | 2012-12-05 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Race condition in the RunAsManager mechanism in VMware SpringSource Spring Security before 2.0.7 and 3.0.x before 3.0.6 stores the Authentication object in the shared security context, which allows attackers to gain privileges via a crafted thread. |
| 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." |
| CVE-2010-3700 | Medium | 2010-10-29 | No exploit published | No public exploit | VMware SpringSource Spring Security 2.x before 2.0.6 and 3.x before 3.0.4, and Acegi Security 1.0.0 through 1.0.7, as used in IBM WebSphere Application Server (WAS) 6.1 and 7.0, allows remote attackers to bypass security constraints via a path parameter. |
| CVE-2009-1190 | Medium | 2009-04-27 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Algorithmic complexity vulnerability in the java.util.regex.Pattern.compile method in Sun Java Development Kit (JDK) before 1.6, when used with spring.jar in SpringSource Spring Framework 1.1.0 through 2.5.6 and 3.0.0.M1 through 3.0.0.M2 and dm Server 1.0.0 through 1.0.2, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (CPU consumption) via serializable data with a long regex string containing multiple optional groups, a related issue to CVE-2004-2540. |