Overview 15 matches · 1 exploited · 1 CISA KEV · 4 public PoC · 3 EPSS ≥ 0.5
Protected by Waratek
15
100.0%
Rule in development
0
0.0%
Mitigation candidate
0
0.0%
No exploit published
0
0.0%
blocked by ARMR today
15
100.0%
partly blocked
0
0.0%
not blocked
0
0.0%
not established
0
0.0%
unrecorded
0
0.0%
split by
peak 4 / year
20171
Protected by Waratek1
High1
blocked by ARMR today1
No public exploit1
20184
Protected by Waratek4
Critical2
High1
Medium1
blocked by ARMR today4
Working exploit published1
Proof of concept only1
Forecast only1
No public exploit1
20190
20202
Protected by Waratek2
Critical1
Medium1
blocked by ARMR today2
Proof of concept only1
No public exploit1
20211
Protected by Waratek1
High1
blocked by ARMR today1
No public exploit1
20223
Protected by Waratek3
Critical1
Medium2
blocked by ARMR today3
Exploited1
No public exploit2
20230
20242
Protected by Waratek2
High1
Medium1
blocked by ARMR today2
No public exploit2
20250
20262
Protected by Waratek2
Medium2
blocked by ARMR today2
No public exploit2
2017201820192020202120222023202420252026
| CVE | Severity | Published▾ | Status | Exploitation | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-59280 | Medium | 2026-08-27 | Protected by Waratek | No public exploit | Applications using Spring Framework's FreeMarker integration may be vulnerable to a path traversal attack when a controller returns a view name derived from untrusted input and FreeMarker is configured to resolve templates through SpringTemplateLoader. 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-2026-41843 | Medium | 2026-06-09 | Protected by Waratek | No public exploit | Spring MVC and WebFlux applications are vulnerable to Path Traversal attacks when resolving static resources. 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-2024-38808 | Medium | 2024-08-20 | Protected by Waratek | No public exploit | In Spring Framework versions 5.3.0 - 5.3.38 and older unsupported versions, it is possible for a user to provide a specially crafted Spring Expression Language (SpEL) expression that may cause a denial of service (DoS) condition. Specifically, an application is vulnerable when the following is true: * The application evaluates user-supplied SpEL expressions. |
| CVE-2024-22259 | High | 2024-03-16 | Protected by Waratek | No public exploit | Applications that use UriComponentsBuilder in Spring Framework to parse an externally provided URL (e.g. through a query parameter) AND perform validation checks on the host of the parsed URL may be vulnerable to a open redirect https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/601.html attack or to a SSRF attack if the URL is used after passing validation checks. This is the same as CVE-2024-22243 https://spring.io/security/cve-2024-22243 , but with different input. |
| CVE-2022-22971 | Medium | 2022-05-12 | Protected by Waratek | No public exploit | In spring framework versions prior to 5.3.20+ , 5.2.22+ and old unsupported versions, application with a STOMP over WebSocket endpoint is vulnerable to a denial of service attack by an authenticated user. |
| 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-2022-22950 | Medium | 2022-04-01 | Protected by Waratek | No public exploit | n Spring Framework versions 5.3.0 - 5.3.16 and older unsupported versions, it is possible for a user to provide a specially crafted SpEL expression that may cause a denial of service condition. |
| 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-2020-5397 | Medium | 2020-01-17 | Protected by Waratek | No public exploit | Spring Framework, versions 5.2.x prior to 5.2.3 are vulnerable to CSRF attacks through CORS preflight requests that target Spring MVC (spring-webmvc module) or Spring WebFlux (spring-webflux module) endpoints. Only non-authenticated endpoints are vulnerable because preflight requests should not include credentials and therefore requests should fail authentication. However a notable exception to this are Chrome based browsers when using client certificates for authentication since Chrome sends TLS client certificates in CORS preflight requests in violation of spec requirements. No HTTP body can be sent or received as a result of this 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-2018-1275 | Critical | 2018-04-11 | Protected by Waratek | Forecast only | Spring Framework, versions 5.0 prior to 5.0.5 and versions 4.3 prior to 4.3.16 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. This CVE addresses the partial fix for CVE-2018-1270 in the 4.3.x branch of the Spring Framework. |
| 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-2018-1271 | 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-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. |