Overview 35 matches · 19 protected · 14 exploited · 6 CISA KEV · 14 EPSS ≥ 0.5
Protected by Waratek
19
54.3%
Rule in development
0
0.0%
Mitigation candidate
16
45.7%
No exploit published
0
0.0%
blocked by ARMR today
19
54.3%
partly blocked
0
0.0%
not blocked
16
45.7%
not established
0
0.0%
unrecorded
0
0.0%
Exploited
14
40.0%
Working exploit published
11
31.4%
Proof of concept only
10
28.6%
Forecast only
0
0.0%
No public exploit
0
0.0%
split by
peak 7 / year
20101
Protected by Waratek1
Medium1
blocked by ARMR today1
Working exploit published1
20111
Protected by Waratek1
Medium1
blocked by ARMR today1
Proof of concept only1
20121
Mitigation candidate1
Medium1
not blocked1
Working exploit published1
20130
20141
Protected by Waratek1
Medium1
blocked by ARMR today1
Proof of concept only1
20150
20160
20171
Mitigation candidate1
High1
not blocked1
Exploited1
20184
Protected by Waratek4
Critical3
Medium1
blocked by ARMR today4
Exploited2
Working exploit published1
Proof of concept only1
20193
Protected by Waratek1
Mitigation candidate2
Medium3
blocked by ARMR today1
not blocked2
Working exploit published3
20204
Protected by Waratek3
Mitigation candidate1
Critical1
High1
Medium2
blocked by ARMR today3
not blocked1
Exploited2
Working exploit published1
Proof of concept only1
20213
Protected by Waratek1
Mitigation candidate2
Critical1
High2
blocked by ARMR today1
not blocked2
Exploited3
20227
Protected by Waratek2
Mitigation candidate5
Critical6
High1
blocked by ARMR today2
not blocked5
Exploited3
Working exploit published1
Proof of concept only3
20233
Protected by Waratek2
Mitigation candidate1
High2
Medium1
blocked by ARMR today2
not blocked1
Exploited1
Proof of concept only2
20242
Protected by Waratek2
High2
blocked by ARMR today2
Exploited1
Working exploit published1
20252
Protected by Waratek1
Mitigation candidate1
Critical1
Medium1
blocked by ARMR today1
not blocked1
Exploited1
Working exploit published1
20262
Mitigation candidate2
Critical1
High1
not blocked2
Working exploit published1
Proof of concept only1
201020122014201620182020202220242026
| CVE | Severity | Published▾ | Status | Exploitation | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-22738 | Critical | 2026-03-27 | Mitigation candidate | Proof of concept only | In Spring AI, a SpEL injection vulnerability exists in SimpleVectorStore when a user-supplied value is used as a filter expression key. A malicious actor could exploit this to execute arbitrary code. Only applications that use SimpleVectorStore and pass user-supplied input as a filter expression key are affected. This issue affects Spring AI: from 1.0.0 before 1.0.5, from 1.1.0 before 1.1.4. |
| CVE-2026-22739 | High | 2026-03-24 | Mitigation candidate | Working exploit published | Vulnerability in Spring Cloud when substituting the profile parameter from a request made to the Spring Cloud Config Server configured to the native file system as a backend, because it was possible to access files outside of the configured search directories.This issue affects Spring Cloud: from 3.1.X before 3.1.13, from 4.1.X before 4.1.9, from 4.2.X before 4.2.3, from 4.3.X before 4.3.2, from 5.0.X before 5.0.2. |
| CVE-2025-41243 | Critical | 2025-09-16 | Mitigation candidate | Exploited | Spring Cloud Gateway Server Webflux may be vulnerable to Spring Environment property modification. An application should be considered vulnerable when all the following are true: * The application is using Spring Cloud Gateway Server Webflux (Spring Cloud Gateway Server WebMVC is not vulnerable). * Spring Boot actuator is a dependency. * The Spring Cloud Gateway Server Webflux actuator web endpoint is enabled via management.endpoints.web.exposure.include=gateway. * The actuator endpoints are available to attackers. * The actuator endpoints are unsecured. |
| CVE-2025-41242 | Medium | 2025-08-18 | Protected by Waratek | 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-2024-38819 | High | 2024-12-19 | Protected by Waratek | 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-2024-38816 | High | 2024-09-13 | Protected by Waratek | Exploited | 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-2023-34050 | Medium | 2023-10-19 | Protected by Waratek | Proof of concept only | In spring AMQP versions 1.0.0 to 2.4.16 and 3.0.0 to 3.0.9 , allowed list patterns for deserializable class names were added to Spring AMQP, allowing users to lock down deserialization of data in messages from untrusted sources; however by default, when no allowed list was provided, all classes could be deserialized. Specifically, an application is vulnerable if * the SimpleMessageConverter or SerializerMessageConverter is used * the user does not configure allowed list patterns * untrusted message originators gain permissions to write messages to the RabbitMQ broker to send malicious content |
| CVE-2023-44487 | High | 2023-10-10 | Mitigation candidate | Exploited | The HTTP/2 protocol allows a denial of service (server resource consumption) because request cancellation can reset many streams quickly, as exploited in the wild in August through October 2023. |
| CVE-2023-34040 | High | 2023-08-24 | Protected by Waratek | Proof of concept only | In Spring for Apache Kafka 3.0.9 and earlier and versions 2.9.10 and earlier, a possible deserialization attack vector existed, but only if unusual configuration was applied. An attacker would have to construct a malicious serialized object in one of the deserialization exception record headers. Specifically, an application is vulnerable when all of the following are true: * The user does not configure an ErrorHandlingDeserializer for the key and/or value of the record * The user explicitly sets container properties checkDeserExWhenKeyNull and/or checkDeserExWhenValueNull container properties to true. * The user allows untrusted sources to publish to a Kafka topic By default, these properties are false, and the container only attempts to deserialize the headers if an ErrorHandlingDeserializer is configured. The ErrorHandlingDeserializer prevents the vulnerability by removing any such malicious headers before processing the record. |
| CVE-2022-31692 | Critical | 2022-10-31 | Mitigation candidate | Proof of concept only | Spring Security, versions 5.7 prior to 5.7.5 and 5.6 prior to 5.6.9 could be susceptible to authorization rules bypass via forward or include dispatcher types. Specifically, an application is vulnerable when all of the following are true: The application expects that Spring Security applies security to forward and include dispatcher types. The application uses the AuthorizationFilter either manually or via the authorizeHttpRequests() method. The application configures the FilterChainProxy to apply to forward and/or include requests (e.g. spring.security.filter.dispatcher-types = request, error, async, forward, include). The application may forward or include the request to a higher privilege-secured endpoint.The application configures Spring Security to apply to every dispatcher type via authorizeHttpRequests().shouldFilterAllDispatcherTypes(true) |
| CVE-2022-32430 | High | 2022-07-21 | Mitigation candidate | Working exploit published | An access control issue in Lin CMS Spring Boot v0.2.1 allows attackers to access the backend information and functions within the application. |
| CVE-2022-22980 | Critical | 2022-06-23 | Mitigation candidate | Proof of concept only | A Spring Data MongoDB application is vulnerable to SpEL Injection when using @Query or @Aggregation-annotated query methods with SpEL expressions that contain query parameter placeholders for value binding if the input is not sanitized. |
| CVE-2022-22978 | Critical | 2022-05-19 | Mitigation candidate | Proof of concept only | In spring security versions prior to 5.4.11+, 5.5.7+ , 5.6.4+ and older unsupported versions, RegexRequestMatcher can easily be misconfigured to be bypassed on some servlet containers. Applications using RegexRequestMatcher with `.` in the regular expression are possibly vulnerable to an authorization bypass. |
| CVE-2022-22965 | Critical | 2022-04-01 | Protected by Waratek | Exploited | 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-2022-22963 | Critical | 2022-04-01 | Protected by Waratek | Exploited | In Spring Cloud Function versions 3.1.6, 3.2.2 and older unsupported versions, when using routing functionality it is possible for a user to provide a specially crafted SpEL as a routing-expression that may result in remote code execution and access to local resources. |
| CVE-2022-22947 | Critical | 2022-03-03 | Mitigation candidate | Exploited | In spring cloud gateway versions prior to 3.1.1+ and 3.0.7+ , applications are vulnerable to a code injection attack when the Gateway Actuator endpoint is enabled, exposed and unsecured. A remote attacker could make a maliciously crafted request that could allow arbitrary remote execution on the remote host. |
| 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-2020-17523 | Critical | 2021-02-03 | Mitigation candidate | Exploited | Apache Shiro before 1.7.1, when using Apache Shiro with Spring, a specially crafted HTTP request may cause an authentication bypass. |
| CVE-2021-21234 | High | 2021-01-05 | Protected by Waratek | Exploited | spring-boot-actuator-logview in a library that adds a simple logfile viewer as spring boot actuator endpoint. It is maven package "eu.hinsch:spring-boot-actuator-logview". In spring-boot-actuator-logview before version 0.2.13 there is a directory traversal vulnerability. The nature of this library is to expose a log file directory via admin (spring boot actuator) HTTP endpoints. Both the filename to view and a base folder (relative to the logging folder root) can be specified via request parameters. While the filename parameter was checked to prevent directory traversal exploits (so that `filename=../somefile` would not work), the base folder parameter was not sufficiently checked, so that `filename=somefile&base=../` could access a file outside the logging base directory). The vulnerability has been patched in release 0.2.13. Any users of 0.2.12 should be able to update without any issues as there are no other changes in that release. There is no workaround to fix the vulnerability other than updating or removing the dependency. However, removing read access of the user the application is run with to any directory not required for running the application can limit the impact. Additionally, access to the logview endpoint can be limited by deploying the application behind a reverse proxy. |
| CVE-2020-5412 | Medium | 2020-08-07 | Mitigation candidate | Exploited | Spring Cloud Netflix, versions 2.2.x prior to 2.2.4, versions 2.1.x prior to 2.1.6, and older unsupported versions allow applications to use the Hystrix Dashboard proxy.stream endpoint to make requests to any server reachable by the server hosting the dashboard. A malicious user, or attacker, can send a request to other servers that should not be exposed publicly. |
| 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-2020-5405 | Medium | 2020-03-05 | Protected by Waratek | Working exploit published | Spring Cloud Config, versions 2.2.x prior to 2.2.2, versions 2.1.x prior to 2.1.7, 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 a directory traversal attack. |
| CVE-2016-1000027 | Critical | 2020-01-02 | Protected by Waratek | 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-2019-11269 | Medium | 2019-06-12 | Mitigation candidate | Working exploit published | Spring Security OAuth versions 2.3 prior to 2.3.6, 2.2 prior to 2.2.5, 2.1 prior to 2.1.5, and 2.0 prior to 2.0.18, as well as older unsupported versions could be susceptible to an open redirector attack that can leak an authorization code. A malicious user or attacker can craft a request to the authorization endpoint using the authorization code grant type, and specify a manipulated redirection URI via the redirect_uri parameter. This can cause the authorization server to redirect the resource owner user-agent to a URI under the control of the attacker with the leaked authorization code. |
| CVE-2019-3799 | Medium | 2019-05-06 | Protected by Waratek | Working exploit published | Spring Cloud Config, versions 2.1.x prior to 2.1.2, versions 2.0.x prior to 2.0.4, and versions 1.4.x prior to 1.4.6, 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 a directory traversal attack. |
| CVE-2019-3778 | Medium | 2019-03-07 | Mitigation candidate | Working exploit published | Spring Security OAuth, versions 2.3 prior to 2.3.5, and 2.2 prior to 2.2.4, and 2.1 prior to 2.1.4, and 2.0 prior to 2.0.17, and older unsupported versions could be susceptible to an open redirector attack that can leak an authorization code. A malicious user or attacker can craft a request to the authorization endpoint using the authorization code grant type, and specify a manipulated redirection URI via the "redirect_uri" parameter. This can cause the authorization server to redirect the resource owner user-agent to a URI under the control of the attacker with the leaked authorization code. This vulnerability exposes applications that meet all of the following requirements: Act in the role of an Authorization Server (e.g. @EnableAuthorizationServer) and uses the DefaultRedirectResolver in the AuthorizationEndpoint. This vulnerability does not expose applications that: Act in the role of an Authorization Server and uses a different RedirectResolver implementation other than DefaultRedirectResolver, act in the role of a Resource Server only (e.g. @EnableResourceServer), act in the role of a Client only (e.g. @EnableOAuthClient). |
| CVE-2018-1273 | Critical | 2018-04-11 | Protected by Waratek | Exploited | Spring Data Commons, versions prior to 1.13 to 1.13.10, 2.0 to 2.0.5, and older unsupported versions, contain a property binder vulnerability caused by improper neutralization of special elements. An unauthenticated remote malicious user (or attacker) can supply specially crafted request parameters against Spring Data REST backed HTTP resources or using Spring Data's projection-based request payload binding hat can lead to a remote code execution attack. |
| CVE-2018-1271 | Medium | 2018-04-06 | Protected by Waratek | Working exploit published | Spring Framework, versions 5.0 prior to 5.0.5 and versions 4.3 prior to 4.3.15 and older unsupported versions, allow applications to configure Spring MVC to serve static resources (e.g. CSS, JS, images). When static resources are served from a file system on Windows (as opposed to the classpath, or the ServletContext), a malicious user can send a request using a specially crafted URL that can lead a directory traversal attack. |
| CVE-2018-1270 | Critical | 2018-04-06 | Protected by Waratek | Proof of concept only | Spring Framework, versions 5.0 prior to 5.0.5 and versions 4.3 prior to 4.3.15 and older unsupported versions, allow 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 remote code execution attack. |
| CVE-2017-8046 | Critical | 2018-01-04 | Protected by Waratek | Exploited | Malicious PATCH requests submitted to servers using Spring Data REST versions prior to 2.6.9 (Ingalls SR9), versions prior to 3.0.1 (Kay SR1) and Spring Boot versions prior to 1.5.9, 2.0 M6 can use specially crafted JSON data to run arbitrary Java code. |
| 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-2014-3625 | Medium | 2014-11-20 | Protected by Waratek | 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-2011-2732 | Medium | 2012-12-05 | Mitigation candidate | Working exploit published | CRLF injection vulnerability in the logout functionality in VMware SpringSource Spring Security before 2.0.7 and 3.0.x before 3.0.6 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary HTTP headers and conduct HTTP response splitting attacks via the spring-security-redirect parameter. |
| CVE-2011-2894 | Medium | 2011-10-04 | Protected by Waratek | Proof of concept only | Spring Framework 3.0.0 through 3.0.5, Spring Security 3.0.0 through 3.0.5 and 2.0.0 through 2.0.6, and possibly other versions deserialize objects from untrusted sources, which allows remote attackers to bypass intended security restrictions and execute untrusted code by (1) serializing a java.lang.Proxy instance and using InvocationHandler, or (2) accessing internal AOP interfaces, as demonstrated using deserialization of a DefaultListableBeanFactory instance to execute arbitrary commands via the java.lang.Runtime class. |
| CVE-2010-1622 | Medium | 2010-06-21 | Protected by Waratek | Working exploit published | SpringSource Spring Framework 2.5.x before 2.5.6.SEC02, 2.5.7 before 2.5.7.SR01, and 3.0.x before 3.0.3 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via an HTTP request containing class.classLoader.URLs[0]=jar: followed by a URL of a crafted .jar file. |