WaratekVRT Sign in
Reset
More filters (1)
Columns
Including CVEs outside Waratek scope✕Product spring-webflux✕
Overview 4 matches · 3 in Waratek scope · 2 protected · 1 exploited · 0 CISA KEV · 3 public PoC · 2 EPSS ≥ 0.5
Protected by Waratek 2 50.0% Rule in development 0 0.0% Mitigation candidate 0 0.0% No exploit published 1 25.0% Outside Waratek scope 1 25.0% Not applicable 0 0.0% Withdrawn CVE 0 0.0%
Critical 0 0.0% High 4 100.0% Medium 0 0.0% Low 0 0.0% None 0 0.0% Unknown 0 0.0%
blocked by ARMR today 2 50.0% partly blocked 0 0.0% not blocked 2 50.0% not established 0 0.0% unrecorded 0 0.0%
split by peak 2 / year
Outside Waratek scope: 1No exploit published: 1Protected by Waratek: 2 High: 4 not blocked: 2blocked by ARMR today: 2 No public exploit: 1Proof of concept only: 1Working exploit published: 1Exploited: 1
2020202120222023202420252026
4 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-2026-41842 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-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-2020-5398 High 2020-01-17 Outside Waratek scope Proof of concept only In Spring Framework, versions 5.2.x prior to 5.2.3, versions 5.1.x prior to 5.1.13, and versions 5.0.x prior to 5.0.16, an application is vulnerable to a reflected file download (RFD) attack when it sets a "Content-Disposition" header in the response where the filename attribute is derived from user supplied input.