Overview 15 matches · 2 protected · 0 exploited · 0 CISA KEV · 1 public PoC · 0 EPSS ≥ 0.5
Protected by Waratek
2
13.3%
Rule in development
0
0.0%
Mitigation candidate
0
0.0%
No exploit published
13
86.7%
blocked by ARMR today
2
13.3%
partly blocked
0
0.0%
not blocked
13
86.7%
not established
0
0.0%
unrecorded
0
0.0%
Exploited
0
0.0%
Working exploit published
1
6.7%
Proof of concept only
0
0.0%
Forecast only
0
0.0%
No public exploit
14
93.3%
split by
peak 10 / month
Aug 251
Protected by Waratek1
Medium1
blocked by ARMR today1
Working exploit published1
Sep 250
Oct 251
No exploit published1
Medium1
not blocked1
No public exploit1
Nov 250
Dec 250
Jan 260
Feb 260
Mar 261
No exploit published1
Medium1
not blocked1
No public exploit1
Apr 262
No exploit published2
Medium2
not blocked2
No public exploit2
May 260
Jun 2610
Protected by Waratek1
No exploit published9
Medium10
blocked by ARMR today1
not blocked9
No public exploit10
Aug 25Sep 25Oct 25Nov 25Dec 25Jan 26Feb 26Mar 26Apr 26May 26Jun 26
| CVE | Severity | Published▾ | Status | Exploitation | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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-2026-41847 | 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-2026-41844 | 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-2026-41843 | 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-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-2026-22745 | 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-2026-22740 | 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-2025-41254 | Medium | 2025-10-16 | No exploit published | No public exploit | STOMP over WebSocket applications may be vulnerable to a security bypass that allows an attacker to send unauthorized messages. Affected Spring Products and VersionsSpring Framework: * 6.2.0 - 6.2.11 * 6.1.0 - 6.1.23 * 6.0.x - 6.0.29 * 5.3.0 - 5.3.45 * Older, unsupported versions are also affected. MitigationUsers of affected versions should upgrade to the corresponding fixed version. Affected version(s)Fix versionAvailability6.2.x6.2.12OSS6.1.x6.1.24 Commercial https://enterprise.spring.io/ 6.0.xN/A Out of support https://spring.io/projects/spring-framework#support 5.3.x5.3.46 Commercial https://enterprise.spring.io/ No further mitigation steps are necessary. CreditThis vulnerability was discovered and responsibly reported by Jannis Kaiser. |
| 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. |