Vulnerabilities (CVE)

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.

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 de ... 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.

Show More

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 t ... 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.

Show More

An issue was discovered in Pivotal Spring Framework before 3.2.18, 4.2.x before 4.2.9, and 4.3.x before 4.3.5. Paths provided to the ResourceServlet were not properly sanitized and as a result exposed to directory traversal attacks.

The Java SockJS client in Pivotal Spring Framework 4.1.x before 4.1.5 generates predictable session ids, which allows remote attackers to send messages to other sessions via unspecified vectors.

Directory traversal vulnerability in Pivotal Spring Framework 3.0.4 through 3.2.x before 3.2.12, 4.0.x before 4.0.8, and 4.1.x before 4.1.2 allows remote attackers to read arbitrary files via unspecified vectors, related to static resource handling.

Pivotal Spring Framework before 3.2.14 and 4.x before 4.1.7 do not properly process inline DTD declarations when DTD is not entirely disabled, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption and out-of-memory errors) via a crafted XML file.

The Jaxb2RootElementHttpMessageConverter in Spring MVC in Spring Framework before 3.2.8 and 4.0.0 before 4.0.2 does not disable external entity resolution, which allows remote attackers to read arbitrary files, cause a denial of service, and conduct CSRF attacks via crafted XML, aka an XML External Entity (XXE) issue. NOTE: this vulnerability exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2013-4152, CVE-2013-7315, and CVE-2013-6429.

The Spring MVC in Spring Framework before 3.2.4 and 4.0.0.M1 through 4.0.0.M2 does not disable external entity resolution for the StAX XMLInputFactory, which allows context-dependent attackers to read arbitrary files, cause a denial of service, and conduct CSRF attacks via crafted XML with JAXB, aka an XML External Entity (XXE) issue, and a different vulnerability than CVE-2013-4152. NOTE: this issue was SPLIT from CVE-2013-4152 due to different affected versions.

The SourceHttpMessageConverter in Spring MVC in Spring Framework before 3.2.5 and 4.0.0.M1 through 4.0.0.RC1 does not disable external entity resolution, which allows remote attackers to read arbitrary files, cause a denial of service, and conduct CSRF attacks via crafted XML, aka an XML External Entity (XXE) issue, and a different vulnerability than CVE-2013-4152 and CVE-2013-7315.

The Spring OXM wrapper in Spring Framework before 3.2.4 and 4.0.0.M1, when using the JAXB marshaller, does not disable entity resolution, which allows context-dependent attackers to read arbitrary files, cause a denial of service, and conduct CSRF attacks via an XML external entity declaration in conjunction with an entity reference in a (1) DOMSource, (2) StAXSource, (3) SAXSource, or (4) StreamSource, aka an XML External Entity (XXE) issue.

Spring Framework 3.0.0 through 3.0.5, Spring Security 3.0.0 through 3.0.5 and 2.0.0 through 2.0.6, and possibly other versions deserialize objects from untrusted sources, which allows remote attackers to bypass intended security restrictions and execute untrusted code by (1) serializing a java.lang.Proxy instance and using InvocationHandler, or (2) accessing internal AOP interfaces, as demonstrated using deserialization of a DefaultListableBeanFactory instance to execute arbitrary commands via t ... Spring Framework 3.0.0 through 3.0.5, Spring Security 3.0.0 through 3.0.5 and 2.0.0 through 2.0.6, and possibly other versions deserialize objects from untrusted sources, which allows remote attackers to bypass intended security restrictions and execute untrusted code by (1) serializing a java.lang.Proxy instance and using InvocationHandler, or (2) accessing internal AOP interfaces, as demonstrated using deserialization of a DefaultListableBeanFactory instance to execute arbitrary commands via the java.lang.Runtime class.

Show More

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.

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.

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.springfr ... 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.

Show More

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.

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.

An issue in Dromara SaToken version 1.36.0 and before allows a remote attacker to escalate privileges via a crafted payload to the URL.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 TL ... 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.

Show More

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.

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 ... 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.

Show More

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 incl ... 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.

Show More

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.