WaratekVRT Sign in
Reset
More filters (1)
Columns
Including CVEs outside Waratek scope✕Product spring-security-core✕
Overview 28 matches · 0 protected · 0 exploited · 0 CISA KEV · 0 public PoC · 0 EPSS ≥ 0.5
28matches 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0 0.0% Mitigation candidate 0 0.0% No exploit published 28 100.0% Outside Waratek scope 0 0.0% Not applicable 0 0.0% Withdrawn CVE 0 0.0%
Critical 2 7.1% High 12 42.9% Medium 13 46.4% Low 1 3.6% None 0 0.0% Unknown 0 0.0%
blocked by ARMR today 0 0.0% partly blocked 0 0.0% not blocked 28 100.0% 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 28 100.0%
split by peak 5 / year
No exploit published: 28 Low: 1Medium: 13High: 12Critical: 2 not blocked: 28 No public exploit: 28
20101 No exploit published1 Medium1 not blocked1 No public exploit1 20110 20122 No exploit published2 Medium2 not blocked2 No public exploit2 20130 20140 20150 20160 20175 No exploit published5 Critical1 High4 not blocked5 No public exploit5 20182 No exploit published2 High1 Medium1 not blocked2 No public exploit2 20192 No exploit published2 High1 Medium1 not blocked2 No public exploit2 20202 No exploit published2 High1 Medium1 not blocked2 No public exploit2 20211 No exploit published1 High1 not blocked1 No public exploit1 20221 No exploit published1 Medium1 not blocked1 No public exploit1 20232 No exploit published2 Medium2 not blocked2 No public exploit2 20244 No exploit published4 High3 Medium1 not blocked4 No public exploit4 20253 No exploit published3 Critical1 High1 Medium1 not blocked3 No public exploit3 20263 No exploit published3 Medium2 Low1 not blocked3 No public exploit3
201020122014201620182020202220242026
28 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-2026-22746 Low 2026-04-22 No exploit published No public exploit Vulnerability in Spring Spring Security. If an application is using the UserDetails#isEnabled, #isAccountNonExpired, or #isAccountNonLocked user attributes, to enable, expire, or lock users, then DaoAuthenticationProvider's timing attack defense can be bypassed for users who are disabled, expired, or locked.This issue affects Spring Security: from 5.7.0 through 5.7.22, from 5.8.0 through 5.8.24, from 6.3.0 through 6.3.15, from 6.5.0 through 6.5.9, from 7.0.0 through 7.0.4.
CVE-2026-22751 Medium 2026-04-21 No exploit published No public exploit Vulnerability in Spring Spring Security. Applications that explicitly configure One-Time Token login with JdbcOneTimeTokenService are vulnerable to a Time-of-check Time-of-use (TOCTOU) race condition. This issue affects Spring Security: from 6.4.0 through 6.4.15, from 6.5.0 through 6.5.9, from 7.0.0 through 7.0.4.
CVE-2025-22234 Medium 2026-01-22 No exploit published No public exploit The fix applied in CVE-2025-22228 inadvertently broke the timing attack mitigation implemented in DaoAuthenticationProvider. This can allow attackers to infer valid usernames or other authentication behavior via response-time differences under certain configurations.
CVE-2025-41248 High 2025-09-16 No exploit published No public exploit The Spring Security annotation detection mechanism may not correctly resolve annotations on methods within type hierarchies with a parameterized super type with unbounded generics. This can be an issue when using @PreAuthorize and other method security annotations, resulting in an authorization bypass. Your application may be affected by this if you are using Spring Security's @EnableMethodSecurity feature. You are not affected by this if you are not using @EnableMethodSecurity or if you do not use security annotations on methods in generic superclasses or generic interfaces. This CVE is published in conjunction with CVE-2025-41249 https://spring.io/security/cve-2025-41249 .
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-2025-22223 Medium 2025-03-24 No exploit published No public exploit Spring Security 6.4.0 - 6.4.3 may not correctly locate method security annotations on parameterized types or methods. This may cause an authorization bypass.  You are not affected if you are not using @EnableMethodSecurity, or you do not have method security annotations on parameterized types or methods, or all method security annotations are attached to target methods
CVE-2024-38827 Medium 2024-12-02 No exploit published No public exploit The usage of String.toLowerCase() and String.toUpperCase() has some Locale dependent exceptions that could potentially result in authorization rules not working properly.
CVE-2024-38810 High 2024-08-20 No exploit published No public exploit Missing Authorization When Using @AuthorizeReturnObject in Spring Security 6.3.0 and 6.3.1 allows attacker to render security annotations inaffective.
CVE-2024-22257 High 2024-03-18 No exploit published No public exploit In Spring Security, versions 5.7.x prior to 5.7.12, 5.8.x prior to 5.8.11, versions 6.0.x prior to 6.0.9, versions 6.1.x prior to 6.1.8, versions 6.2.x prior to 6.2.3, an application is possible vulnerable to broken access control when it directly uses the AuthenticatedVoter#vote passing a null Authentication parameter.
CVE-2024-22234 High 2024-02-20 No exploit published No public exploit In Spring Security, versions 6.1.x prior to 6.1.7 and versions 6.2.x prior to 6.2.2, an application is vulnerable to broken access control when it directly uses the AuthenticationTrustResolver.isFullyAuthenticated(Authentication) method. Specifically, an application is vulnerable if: * The application uses AuthenticationTrustResolver.isFullyAuthenticated(Authentication) directly and a null authentication parameter is passed to it resulting in an erroneous true return value. An application is not vulnerable if any of the following is true: * The application does not use AuthenticationTrustResolver.isFullyAuthenticated(Authentication) directly. * The application does not pass null to AuthenticationTrustResolver.isFullyAuthenticated * The application only uses isFullyAuthenticated via Method Security https://docs.spring.io/spring-security/reference/servlet/authorization/method-security.html  or HTTP Request Security https://docs.spring.io/spring-security/reference/servlet/authorization/authorize-http-requests.html
CVE-2023-45669 Medium 2023-10-16 No exploit published No public exploit WebAuthn4J Spring Security provides Web Authentication specification support for Spring applications. Affected versions are subject to improper signature counter value handling. A flaw was found in webauthn4j-spring-security-core. When an authneticator returns an incremented signature counter value during authentication, webauthn4j-spring-security-core does not properly persist the value, which means cloned authenticator detection does not work. An attacker who cloned valid authenticator in some way can use the cloned authenticator without being detected. This issue has been addressed in version `0.9.1.RELEASE`. Users are advised to upgrade. There are no known workarounds for this vulnerability.
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-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-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-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-2019-3795 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-2018-1199 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-2017-4995 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-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-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-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-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.