WaratekVRT Sign in
Reset
More filters (2)
Columns
Published from 2015-01-01✕Vendor org.springframework.security✕
Overview 23 matches · 1 protected · 0 exploited · 0 CISA KEV · 0 public PoC · 0 EPSS ≥ 0.5
23matches 1protected4.3% 0exploited0.0% 0CISA KEV0.0% 0public PoC0.0% 0EPSS ≥ 0.50.0%
23 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-2026-47838 High 2026-06-10 No exploit published No public exploit SubjectDnX509PrincipalExtractor does not correctly handle certain malformed X.509 certificate CN values, which can lead to reading the wrong value for the username. In a carefully crafted certificate, this can lead to an attacker impersonating another user. Affected versions: Spring Security 5.7.0 through 5.7.24; 5.8.0 through 5.8.26; 6.3.0 through 6.3.17; 6.4.0 through 6.4.17; 6.5.0 through 6.5.10.
CVE-2026-41003 High 2026-06-10 No exploit published No public exploit An attacker able to influence values in RelyingPartyRegistration may be able to run arbitrary code on HTML forms generated by Spring Security filters. Affected versions: Spring Security 5.7.0 through 5.7.23; 5.8.0 through 5.8.25; 6.3.0 through 6.3.16; 6.4.0 through 6.4.16; 6.5.0 through 6.5.10; 7.0.0 through 7.0.5.
CVE-2026-40993 High 2026-06-10 Protected by Waratek No public exploit An attacker with write permissions to the database table managed by JdbcAssertingPartyMetadataRepository (saml2_asserting_party_metadata) may be able to store malicious serialized payloads in the columns containing the collection of verification or encryption credentials (verification_credentials and encryption_credentials, respectively). Affected versions: Spring Security 7.0.0 through 7.0.5.
CVE-2026-40988 High 2026-06-10 No exploit published No public exploit An application using spring-security-saml2-service-provider and the REDIRECT binding for SAML 2.0 Login or Logout may be vulnerable to a denial of service by way of an unbounded writer that inflates the compressed SAML payload into memory. Affected versions: Spring Security 5.7.0 through 5.7.23; 5.8.0 through 5.8.25; 6.3.0 through 6.3.16; 6.4.0 through 6.4.16; 6.5.0 through 6.5.10; 7.0.0 through 7.0.5.
CVE-2026-22754 High 2026-04-22 No exploit published No public exploit Vulnerability in Spring Spring Security. If an application uses <sec:intercept-url servlet-path="/servlet-path" pattern="/endpoint/**"/> to define the servlet path for computing a path matcher, then the servlet path is not included and the related authorization rules are not exercised. This can lead to an authorization bypass.This issue affects Spring Security: from 7.0.0 through 7.0.4.
CVE-2026-22753 High 2026-04-22 No exploit published No public exploit Vulnerability in Spring Spring Security. If an application is using securityMatchers(String) and a PathPatternRequestMatcher.Builder bean to prepend a servlet path, matching requests to that filter chain may fail and its related security components will not be exercised as intended by the application. This can lead to the authentication, authorization, and other security controls being rendered inactive on intended requests.This issue affects Spring Security: from 7.0.0 through 7.0.4.
CVE-2026-22747 High 2026-04-22 No exploit published No public exploit Vulnerability in Spring Spring Security. SubjectX500PrincipalExtractor does not correctly handle certain malformed X.509 certificate CN values, which can lead to reading the wrong value for the username. In a carefully crafted certificate, this can lead to an attacker impersonating another user. This issue affects Spring Security: from 7.0.0 through 7.0.4.
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-2025-22228 High 2025-03-20 No exploit published No public exploit BCryptPasswordEncoder.matches(CharSequence,String) will incorrectly return true for passwords larger than 72 characters as long as the first 72 characters are the same.
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-2023-34035 High 2023-07-18 No exploit published No public exploit Spring Security versions 5.8 prior to 5.8.5, 6.0 prior to 6.0.5, and 6.1 prior to 6.1.2 could be susceptible to authorization rule misconfiguration if the application uses requestMatchers(String) and multiple servlets, one of them being Spring MVC’s DispatcherServlet. (DispatcherServlet is a Spring MVC component that maps HTTP endpoints to methods on @Controller-annotated classes.) Specifically, an application is vulnerable when all of the following are true: * Spring MVC is on the classpath * Spring Security is securing more than one servlet in a single application (one of them being Spring MVC’s DispatcherServlet) * The application uses requestMatchers(String) to refer to endpoints that are not Spring MVC endpoints An application is not vulnerable if any of the following is true: * The application does not have Spring MVC on the classpath * The application secures no servlets other than Spring MVC’s DispatcherServlet * The application uses requestMatchers(String) only for Spring MVC endpoints
CVE-2022-31690 High 2022-10-31 No exploit published No public exploit Spring Security, versions 5.7 prior to 5.7.5, and 5.6 prior to 5.6.9, and older unsupported versions could be susceptible to a privilege escalation under certain conditions. A malicious user or attacker can modify a request initiated by the Client (via the browser) to the Authorization Server which can lead to a privilege escalation on the subsequent approval. This scenario can happen if the Authorization Server responds with an OAuth2 Access Token Response containing an empty scope list (per RFC 6749, Section 5.1) on the subsequent request to the token endpoint to obtain the access token.
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-2021-22112 High 2021-02-23 No exploit published No public exploit Spring Security 5.4.x prior to 5.4.4, 5.3.x prior to 5.3.8.RELEASE, 5.2.x prior to 5.2.9.RELEASE, and older unsupported versions can fail to save the SecurityContext if it is changed more than once in a single request.A malicious user cannot cause the bug to happen (it must be programmed in). However, if the application's intent is to only allow the user to run with elevated privileges in a small portion of the application, the bug can be leveraged to extend those privileges to the rest of the application.
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-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-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-2014-0097 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.