Overview 57 matches · 0 protected · 0 exploited · 0 CISA KEV · 0 public PoC · 0 EPSS ≥ 0.5
57matches
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
57
100.0%
blocked by ARMR today
0
0.0%
partly blocked
0
0.0%
not blocked
57
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
57
100.0%
split by
peak 38 / year
20172
No exploit published2
Critical1
High1
not blocked2
No public exploit2
20186
No exploit published6
High3
Medium3
not blocked6
No public exploit6
20190
20201
No exploit published1
Medium1
not blocked1
No public exploit1
20211
No exploit published1
Medium1
not blocked1
No public exploit1
20223
No exploit published3
Medium3
not blocked3
No public exploit3
20234
No exploit published4
High2
Medium2
not blocked4
No public exploit4
20242
No exploit published2
High1
Medium1
not blocked2
No public exploit2
20250
202638
No exploit published38
Critical7
High13
Medium15
Low3
not blocked38
No public exploit38
2017201820192020202120222023202420252026
| CVE | Severity | Published▾ | Status | Exploitation | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2026-59314 | Low | 2026-08-27 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Applications that build a Content-Disposition header value from untrusted input may be vulnerable to HTTP response splitting when the input is a malicious file name. 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-2026-59313 | 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-2026-59282 | High | 2026-08-27 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Spring Framework applications that use Spring's data binding infrastructure to apply user-supplied property paths onto a target object may be vulnerable to a Denial of Service (DoS) attack. 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-2026-59281 | Medium | 2026-08-27 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Spring MVC and WebFlux applications that obtain a data-binding Errors instance with HTML escaping enabled and then render field errors using the no-argument Errors.getFieldErrors() or Errors.getFieldError() accessors are vulnerable to arbitrary HTML/JavaScript code injection, potentially resulting in a reflected cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability. 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-2026-47893 | High | 2026-08-27 | No exploit published | No public exploit | A Spring WebFlux application that supports WebSocket connections may expose indirectly sensitive user information by including request headers in an exception reason. 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-2026-47892 | 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-2026-47889 | High | 2026-08-27 | No exploit published | No public exploit | A WebFlux application running on the Jetty 12 Core reactive adapter serializes response cookies without the sameSite attribute. Spring Framework 7.0.0 - 7.0.8 Spring Framework 6.2.0 - 6.2.19 |
| CVE-2026-47888 | High | 2026-08-27 | No exploit published | No public exploit | A Spring RSocket application is exposed to a memory leak via a malformed SETUP frame. 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 5.2.0.RELEASE - 5.2.25.RELEASE |
| CVE-2026-47887 | Medium | 2026-08-27 | No exploit published | No public exploit | A Spring MVC application that uses UrlFileNameViewController that is mapped with an end-of-path, and does not have a configured prefix is vulnerable to an open redirect. 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-2026-47886 | High | 2026-08-27 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Applications that evaluate user-supplied Spring Expression Language (SpEL) expressions may be vulnerable to a Denial of Service (DoS) attack when the power operator (^) is used with a BigDecimal or BigInteger operand and a large exponent value. 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-2026-47885 | High | 2026-08-27 | No exploit published | No public exploit | The PartEventHttpMessageReader in Spring WebFlux does not enforce the maxPartSize limit when maxInMemorySize is set to -1. Spring Framework 7.0.0 - 7.0.8 Spring Framework 6.2.0 - 6.2.19 Spring Framework 6.1.0 - 6.1.28 |
| 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-2026-47883 | Medium | 2026-08-27 | No exploit published | No public exploit | UrlHandlerFilter can be vulnerable to an open redirect when configured with very broadly matching patterns. The issue applies to the filter variants in both Spring MVC and Spring WebFlux. Spring Framework 7.0.0 - 7.0.8 Spring Framework 6.2.0 - 6.2.19 |
| 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-2026-41854 | Medium | 2026-06-09 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Due to incorrect host parsing, applications that rely on UriComponentsBuilder to parse and validate an externally provided URL string may be exposed to a server-side request forgery (SSRF) attack. Affected versions: Spring Framework 7.0.0 through 7.0.7; 6.2.0 through 6.2.18. |
| CVE-2026-41853 | Medium | 2026-06-09 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Spring MVC and WebFlux applications are vulnerable to Multipart request smuggling attacks. 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-2026-41852 | Medium | 2026-06-09 | No exploit published | No public exploit | A vulnerability in Spring Expression Language (SpEL) evaluation logic allows for arbitrary zero-argument method invocation, even within restricted or read-only contexts, which may allow an attacker to invoke unintended application logic. 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-2026-41851 | High | 2026-06-09 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Applications which accept user-supplied Spring Expression Language (SpEL) expressions may be vulnerable to a Denial of Service (DoS) attack if the evaluation of a SpEL expression triggers unbounded cache growth. 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-2026-41850 | High | 2026-06-09 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Applications that evaluate user-supplied Spring Expression Language (SpEL) expressions are vulnerable to an Algorithmic Denial of Service (DoS). By providing a specially crafted expression, an attacker can trigger excessive resource consumption during evaluation, leading to application degradation or unavailability. 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-2026-41849 | High | 2026-06-09 | No exploit published | No public exploit | An integer overflow vulnerability exists in the evaluation logic of the Spring Expression Language (SpEL). An attacker can exploit this by supplying a specially crafted SpEL expression that triggers excessive resource consumption, resulting in a Denial of Service (DoS). Affected versions: Spring Framework 5.3.0 through 5.3.48. |
| CVE-2026-41848 | High | 2026-06-09 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Applications may be vulnerable to a Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) attack if an attacker is able to provide a pattern which is then directly or indirectly supplied to one of the following methods in AntPathMatcher: match(String pattern, String path), matchStart(String pattern, String path), extractUriTemplateVariables(String pattern, String path). 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-2026-41847 | Medium | 2026-06-09 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Spring WebFlux applications may be vulnerable to a security bypass when using the Kotlin Router DSL. Affected versions: Spring Framework 5.3.0 through 5.3.48. |
| CVE-2026-41846 | Medium | 2026-06-09 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Spring MVC applications which accept user-supplied values in the cssClass, cssErrorClass, or cssStyle attributes of JSP form tags allow arbitrary HTML/JavaScript code injection, potentially resulting in a cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability. 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-2026-41845 | High | 2026-06-09 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Due to incorrect escaping, the use of JavaScriptUtils.javaScriptEscape() may lead to JavaScript code injection in the browser, potentially resulting in a cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability. 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-2026-41844 | Medium | 2026-06-09 | No exploit published | No public exploit | A Spring MVC or Spring WebFlux application which configures a mapping for "/**" where the view name is not explicitly specified allows an attacker to craft a link resulting in a 302 redirect to an arbitrary external host via the redirect: prefix. 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-2026-41842 | High | 2026-06-09 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Spring MVC and WebFlux applications are vulnerable to Denial of Service (DoS) 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-2026-41841 | Medium | 2026-06-09 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Spring MVC and WebFlux applications are vulnerable to Information Disclosure 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-2026-41840 | Medium | 2026-06-09 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Spring WebFlux applications are vulnerable to Denial of Service (DoS) attacks when processing multipart requests. 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-2026-41839 | Medium | 2026-06-09 | No exploit published | No public exploit | A WebFlux application with a compromised subdomain (for example, compromised via cross-site scripting (XSS)) is vulnerable to an escalation attack exchanging a known session ID for that of an authenticated user. 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-2026-41838 | High | 2026-06-09 | No exploit published | No public exploit | IDs for WebSocket sessions in the spring-websocket module are not cryptographically unpredictable, which may be possible to exploit in combination with inadequate authorization rules. 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-2026-22745 | Medium | 2026-04-29 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Spring MVC and WebFlux applications are vulnerable to Denial of Service attacks when resolving static resources. More precisely, an application can be vulnerable when all the following are true: * the application is using Spring MVC or Spring WebFlux * the application is serving static resources from the file system * the application is running on a Windows platform When all the conditions above are met, the attacker can send malicious requests that are slow to resolve and that can keep HTTP connections in use. This can cause a Denial of Service on the application. |
| CVE-2026-22741 | Low | 2026-04-29 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Spring MVC and WebFlux applications are vulnerable to cache poisoning when resolving static resources. More precisely, an application can be vulnerable when all the following are true: * the application is using Spring MVC or Spring WebFlux * the application is configuring the resource chain support https://docs.spring.io/spring-framework/reference/web/webmvc/mvc-config/static-resources.html#page-title with caching enabled * the application adds support for encoded resources resolution * the resource cache must be empty when the attacker has access to the application When all the conditions above are met, the attacker can send malicious requests and poison the resource cache with resources using the wrong encoding. This can cause a denial of service by breaking the front-end application for clients. |
| CVE-2026-22740 | Medium | 2026-04-29 | No exploit published | No public exploit | A WebFlux server application that processes multipart requests creates temp files for parts larger than 10 K. Under some circumstances, temp files may remain not deleted after the request is fully processed. This allows an attacker to consume available disk space. Older, unsupported versions are also affected. |
| CVE-2026-22737 | Medium | 2026-03-20 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Use of Java scripting engine enabled (e.g. JRuby, Jython) template views in Spring MVC and Spring WebFlux applications can result in disclosure of content from files outside the configured locations for script template views. This issue affects Spring Framework: from 7.0.0 through 7.0.5, from 6.2.0 through 6.2.16, from 6.1.0 through 6.1.25, from 5.3.0 through 5.3.46. |
| CVE-2026-22735 | Low | 2026-03-20 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Spring MVC and WebFlux applications are vulnerable to stream corruption when using Server-Sent Events (SSE). This issue affects Spring Foundation: from 7.0.0 through 7.0.5, from 6.2.0 through 6.2.16, from 6.1.0 through 6.1.25, from 5.3.0 through 5.3.46. |
| CVE-2024-38820 | Medium | 2024-10-18 | No exploit published | No public exploit | The fix for CVE-2022-22968 made disallowedFields patterns in DataBinder case insensitive. However, String.toLowerCase() has some Locale dependent exceptions that could potentially result in fields not protected as expected. |
| CVE-2024-22233 | High | 2024-01-22 | No exploit published | No public exploit | In Spring Framework versions 6.0.15 and 6.1.2, it is possible for a user to provide specially crafted HTTP requests that may cause a denial-of-service (DoS) condition. Specifically, an application is vulnerable when all of the following are true: * the application uses Spring MVC * Spring Security 6.1.6+ or 6.2.1+ is on the classpath Typically, Spring Boot applications need the org.springframework.boot:spring-boot-starter-web and org.springframework.boot:spring-boot-starter-security dependencies to meet all conditions. |
| CVE-2023-34053 | High | 2023-11-28 | No exploit published | No public exploit | In Spring Framework versions 6.0.0 - 6.0.13, it is possible for a user to provide specially crafted HTTP requests that may cause a denial-of-service (DoS) condition. Specifically, an application is vulnerable when all of the following are true: * the application uses Spring MVC or Spring WebFlux * io.micrometer:micrometer-core is on the classpath * an ObservationRegistry is configured in the application to record observations Typically, Spring Boot applications need the org.springframework.boot:spring-boot-actuator dependency to meet all conditions. |
| 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-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-2022-22968 | 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-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-2021-22096 | 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-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-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-2018-11040 | 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-2018-1199 | 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-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. |