WaratekVRT Sign in
Reset
More filters (1)
Columns
Product: Spring✕
Overview 22 matches · 0 protected · 0 exploited · 0 CISA KEV · 0 public PoC · 0 EPSS ≥ 0.5
22matches 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 22 100.0%
Critical 22 100.0% High 0 0.0% Medium 0 0.0% Low 0 0.0% None 0 0.0% Unknown 0 0.0%
blocked by ARMR today 0 0.0% partly blocked 0 0.0% not blocked 22 100.0% 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 22 100.0%
split by peak 14 / year
No exploit published: 22 Critical: 22 not blocked: 22 No public exploit: 22
20172 No exploit published2 Critical2 not blocked2 No public exploit2 20181 No exploit published1 Critical1 not blocked1 No public exploit1 20190 20201 No exploit published1 Critical1 not blocked1 No public exploit1 20210 20220 20232 No exploit published2 Critical2 not blocked2 No public exploit2 20241 No exploit published1 Critical1 not blocked1 No public exploit1 20251 No exploit published1 Critical1 not blocked1 No public exploit1 202614 No exploit published14 Critical14 not blocked14 No public exploit14
2017201820192020202120222023202420252026
22 matches Sign in to download these CVEs as CSV or JSON, or to follow them in a feed.
CVE Severity Published▾ Status Exploitation Description
CVE-2026-59354 Critical 2026-08-27 No exploit published No public exploit In versions of Spring Security's OAuth2 Authorization Server module 7.0.0 through 7.0.4, when Dynamic Client Registration is explicitly enabled, the registration endpoint performs insufficient validation of certain client metadata fields supplied by the registering client. An attacker who possesses a valid Initial Access Token can register a malicious client with crafted metadata, which, depending on server configuration and how the metadata is later rendered or used, may result in Stored Cross-Site Scripting (XSS), Privilege Escalation, or Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF).
CVE-2026-59313 Critical 2026-08-27 No exploit published No public exploit Spring MVC applications using the functional web framework are vulnerable to stream corruption when using Server-Sent Events (SSE). Spring Framework 7.0.0 - 7.0.8 Spring Framework 6.2.0 - 6.2.19 Spring Framework 6.1.0 - 6.1.28 Spring Framework 6.0.0 - 6.0.30 Spring Framework 5.3.0 - 5.3.49
CVE-2026-59283 Critical 2026-08-27 No exploit published No public exploit Applications that evaluate Spring Expression Language (SpEL) expressions using SimpleEvaluationContext may be vulnerable to a safety guard bypass when the SpEL expression compiler is active. Spring Framework 7.0.0 - 7.0.8 Spring Framework 6.2.0 - 6.2.19 Spring Framework 6.1.0 - 6.1.28 Spring Framework 6.0.0 - 6.0.30 Spring Framework 5.3.0 - 5.3.49 Spring Framework 5.2.25.RELEASE and earlier
CVE-2026-59270 Critical 2026-08-27 No exploit published No public exploit Spring Security's embedded UnboundID LDAP server (UnboundIdContainer) unconditionally registers an administrative credential and binds its listener to all available network interfaces. Spring Security 7.1.0 Spring Security 7.0.0 - 7.0.6 Spring Security 6.5.0 - 6.5.11 Spring Security 6.4.0 - 6.4.18 Spring Security 5.8.0 - 5.8.27 Spring Security 5.7.0 - 5.7.25
CVE-2026-47892 Critical 2026-08-27 No exploit published No public exploit A WebFlux application using functional endpoints and deployed with DispatcherServlet may be vulnerable to a header predicate bypass in a pre-flight request. Spring Framework 7.0.0 - 7.0.8 Spring Framework 6.2.0 - 6.2.19 Spring Framework 6.1.0 - 6.1.28 Spring Framework 6.0.0 - 6.0.30 Spring Framework 5.3.0 - 5.3.49 Spring Framework 5.2.5.RELEASE - 5.2.25.RELEASE
CVE-2026-47891 Critical 2026-08-27 No exploit published No public exploit A Spring WebFlux application that relies on the Aalto XML processor to parse XML input does not correctly enforce the maxInMemorySize limit. Spring Framework 7.0.0 - 7.0.8 Spring Framework 6.2.0 - 6.2.19 Spring Framework 6.1.0 - 6.1.28 Spring Framework 6.0.0 - 6.0.30 Spring Framework 5.3.0 - 5.3.49 Spring Framework 5.2.25.RELEASE and earlier
CVE-2026-47890 Critical 2026-08-27 No exploit published No public exploit Spring MVC and WebFlux applications are vulnerable to stream corruption when using Server-Sent Events (SSE) with view fragments. Spring Framework 7.0.0 - 7.0.8 Spring Framework 6.2.0 - 6.2.19
CVE-2026-47884 Critical 2026-08-27 No exploit published No public exploit Use of XsltView in a Spring MVC application can result in SSRF and RCE attack if the application has an "/**" mapping that results in view rendering, and where the view name is not explicitly specified. Spring Framework 7.0.0 - 7.0.8 Spring Framework 6.2.0 - 6.2.19 Spring Framework 6.1.0 - 6.1.28 Spring Framework 6.0.0 - 6.0.30 Spring Framework 5.3.0 - 5.3.49 Spring Framework 5.2.25.RELEASE and earlier
CVE-2026-59318 Critical 2026-08-21 No exploit published No public exploit In Spring AI's tool calling support, the per-request tool list is advertised to the model as a boundary but is not fully enforced when a tool call is dispatched. Under certain conditions, a tool that was not made available to the current request could be invoked, potentially leading to privilege escalation. Affected versions: Spring AI: 2.0.0 Spring AI: 1.1.0 through 1.1.8 Spring AI: 1.0.0 through 1.0.9
CVE-2026-41855 Critical 2026-06-09 No exploit published No public exploit In an untrusted JMS environment, org.springframework.jms.support.converter.MappingJackson2MessageConverter and org.springframework.jms.support.converter.JacksonJsonMessageConverter allow arbitrary class instantiation, which can lead to unauthorized actions via gadget class deserialization. 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-2026-40976 Critical 2026-04-28 No exploit published No public exploit In certain circumstances, Spring Boot's default web security is ineffective allowing unauthorized access to all endpoints. For an application to be vulnerable, it must: be a servlet-based web application; have no Spring Security configuration of its own and rely on the default web security filter chain; depend on spring-boot-actuator-autoconfigure; not depend on spring-boot-health. If any of the above does not apply, the application is not vulnerable. Affected: Spring Boot 4.0.0–4.0.5; upgrade to 4.0.6 or later per vendor advisory.
CVE-2026-40974 Critical 2026-04-28 No exploit published No public exploit Spring Boot's Cassandra auto-configuration does not perform hostname verification when establishing an SSL connection to Cassandra. Affected: Spring Boot 4.0.0–4.0.5 (fix 4.0.6), 3.5.0–3.5.13 (fix 3.5.14), 3.4.0–3.4.15 (fix 3.4.16), 3.3.0–3.3.18 (fix 3.3.19), 2.7.0–2.7.32 (fix 2.7.33); Cassandra SSL auto-configuration. Versions that are no longer supported are also affected per vendor advisory.
CVE-2026-40971 Critical 2026-04-27 No exploit published No public exploit When configured to use an SSL bundle, Spring Boot's RabbitMQ auto-configuration does not perform hostname verification when connecting to the RabbitMQ broker. Affected: Spring Boot 4.0.0–4.0.5 (fix 4.0.6), 3.5.0–3.5.13 (fix 3.5.14) per vendor advisory.
CVE-2026-22732 Critical 2026-03-19 No exploit published No public exploit When applications specify HTTP response headers for servlet applications using Spring Security, there is the possibility that the HTTP Headers will not be written.  This issue affects Spring Security Servlet applications using lazy (default) writing of HTTP Headers: : from 5.7.0 through 5.7.21, from 5.8.0 through 5.8.23, from 6.3.0 through 6.3.14, from 6.4.0 through 6.4.14, from 6.5.0 through 6.5.8, from 7.0.0 through 7.0.3.
CVE-2025-41232 Critical 2025-05-21 No exploit published No public exploit Spring Security Aspects may not correctly locate method security annotations on private methods. This can cause an authorization bypass. Your application may be affected by this if the following are true: * You are using @EnableMethodSecurity(mode=ASPECTJ) and spring-security-aspects, and * You have Spring Security method annotations on a private method In that case, the target method may be able to be invoked without proper authorization. You are not affected if: * You are not using @EnableMethodSecurity(mode=ASPECTJ) or spring-security-aspects, or * You have no Spring Security-annotated private methods
CVE-2024-38821 Critical 2024-10-28 No exploit published No public exploit Spring WebFlux applications that have Spring Security authorization rules on static resources can be bypassed under certain circumstances. For this to impact an application, all of the following must be true: * It must be a WebFlux application * It must be using Spring's static resources support * It must have a non-permitAll authorization rule applied to the static resources support
CVE-2023-34034 Critical 2023-07-19 No exploit published No public exploit Using "**" as a pattern in Spring Security configuration for WebFlux creates a mismatch in pattern matching between Spring Security and Spring WebFlux, and the potential for a security bypass.
CVE-2023-20873 Critical 2023-04-20 No exploit published No public exploit In Spring Boot versions 3.0.0 - 3.0.5, 2.7.0 - 2.7.10, and older unsupported versions, an application that is deployed to Cloud Foundry could be susceptible to a security bypass. Users of affected versions should apply the following mitigation: 3.0.x users should upgrade to 3.0.6+. 2.7.x users should upgrade to 2.7.11+. Users of older, unsupported versions should upgrade to 3.0.6+ or 2.7.11+.
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-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-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.