| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| When using the CAS Proxy ticket authentication from Spring Security 3.1 to 3.2.4 a malicious CAS Service could trick another CAS Service into authenticating a proxy ticket that was not associated. This is due to the fact that the proxy ticket authentication uses the information from the HttpServletRequest which is populated based upon untrusted information within the HTTP request. This means if there are access control restrictions on which CAS services can authenticate to one another, those restrictions can be bypassed. If users are not using CAS Proxy tickets and not basing access control decisions based upon the CAS Service, then there is no impact to users. |
| 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. |
| 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 |
| Missing Authorization When Using @AuthorizeReturnObject in Spring Security 6.3.0 and 6.3.1 allows attacker to render security annotations inaffective. |
| In Spring Security, versions 5.7.x prior to 5.7.8, versions 5.8.x prior to 5.8.3, and versions 6.0.x prior to 6.0.3, the logout support does not properly clean the security context if using serialized versions. Additionally, it is not possible to explicitly save an empty security context to the HttpSessionSecurityContextRepository. This vulnerability can keep users authenticated even after they performed logout. Users of affected versions should apply the following mitigation. 5.7.x users should upgrade to 5.7.8. 5.8.x users should upgrade to 5.8.3. 6.0.x users should upgrade to 6.0.3. |
| 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
|
| Using "**" as a pattern in Spring Security configuration
for WebFlux creates a mismatch in pattern matching between Spring
Security and Spring WebFlux, and the potential for a security bypass.
|
| In spring security versions prior to 5.4.11+, 5.5.7+ , 5.6.4+ and older unsupported versions, RegexRequestMatcher can easily be misconfigured to be bypassed on some servlet containers. Applications using RegexRequestMatcher with `.` in the regular expression are possibly vulnerable to an authorization bypass. |
| Spring Security versions 5.5.x prior to 5.5.7, 5.6.x prior to 5.6.4, and earlier unsupported versions contain an integer overflow vulnerability. When using the BCrypt class with the maximum work factor (31), the encoder does not perform any salt rounds, due to an integer overflow error. The default settings are not affected by this CVE. |
| 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. |
| 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. |
| Spring Security versions 5.3.x prior to 5.3.2, 5.2.x prior to 5.2.4, 5.1.x prior to 5.1.10, 5.0.x prior to 5.0.16 and 4.2.x prior to 4.2.16 use a fixed null initialization vector with CBC Mode in the implementation of the queryable text encryptor. A malicious user with access to the data that has been encrypted using such an encryptor may be able to derive the unencrypted values using a dictionary attack. |
| Spring Security versions 4.2.x prior to 4.2.12, 5.0.x prior to 5.0.12, and 5.1.x prior to 5.1.5 contain an insecure randomness vulnerability when using SecureRandomFactoryBean#setSeed to configure a SecureRandom instance. In order to be impacted, an honest application must provide a seed and make the resulting random material available to an attacker for inspection. |
| 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 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. |
