| CVE |
Vendors |
Products |
Updated |
CVSS v3.1 |
| Spring MVC controller methods with an @RequestBody byte[] method parameter are vulnerable to a DoS attack. |
| A critical SQL injection vulnerability in Spring AI's MariaDBFilterExpressionConverter allows attackers to bypass metadata-based access controls and execute arbitrary SQL commands.
The vulnerability exists due to missing input sanitization. |
| A JSONPath injection vulnerability in Spring AI's AbstractFilterExpressionConverter allows authenticated users to bypass metadata-based access controls through crafted filter expressions. User-controlled input passed to FilterExpressionBuilder is concatenated into JSONPath queries without proper escaping, enabling attackers to inject arbitrary JSONPath logic and access unauthorized documents.
This vulnerability affects applications using vector stores that extend AbstractFilterExpressionConverter for multi-tenant isolation, role-based access control, or document filtering based on metadata.
The vulnerability occurs when user-supplied values in filter expressions are not escaped before being inserted into JSONPath queries. Special characters like ", ||, and && are passed through unescaped, allowing injection of arbitrary JSONPath logic that can alter the intended query semantics. |
| Spring Cloud Config, versions 2.2.x prior to 2.2.3, versions 2.1.x prior to 2.1.9, and older unsupported versions allow applications to serve arbitrary configuration files through the spring-cloud-config-server module. A malicious user, or attacker, can send a request using a specially crafted URL that can lead to a directory traversal attack. |
| In spring cloud gateway versions prior to 3.1.1+ and 3.0.7+ , applications are vulnerable to a code injection attack when the Gateway Actuator endpoint is enabled, exposed and unsecured. A remote attacker could make a maliciously crafted request that could allow arbitrary remote execution on the remote host. |
| In Spring Cloud Function versions 3.1.6, 3.2.2 and older unsupported versions, when using routing functionality it is possible for a user to provide a specially crafted SpEL as a routing-expression that may result in remote code execution and access to local resources. |
| 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. |
| 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". |
| 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. |
| 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. |
| In Spring Cloud Contract, versions 4.1.x prior to 4.1.1, versions 4.0.x prior to 4.0.5, and versions 3.1.x prior to 3.1.10, test execution is vulnerable to local information disclosure via temporary directory created with unsafe permissions through the shaded com.google.guava:guava dependency in the org.springframework.cloud:spring-cloud-contract-shade dependency.
|
| The spring-security.xsd file inside the
spring-security-config jar is world writable which means that if it were
extracted it could be written by anyone with access to the file system.
While there are no known exploits, this is an example of “CWE-732:
Incorrect Permission Assignment for Critical Resource” and could result
in an exploit. Users should update to the latest version of Spring
Security to mitigate any future exploits found around this issue.
|
| Applications that allow HTTP PATCH access to resources exposed by Spring Data REST in versions 3.6.0 - 3.5.5, 3.7.0 - 3.7.2, and older unsupported versions, if an attacker knows about the structure of the underlying domain model, they can craft HTTP requests that expose hidden entity attributes. |
| 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. |
| Spring Security, versions 5.7 prior to 5.7.5 and 5.6 prior to 5.6.9 could be susceptible to authorization rules bypass via forward or include dispatcher types. Specifically, an application is vulnerable when all of the following are true: The application expects that Spring Security applies security to forward and include dispatcher types. The application uses the AuthorizationFilter either manually or via the authorizeHttpRequests() method. The application configures the FilterChainProxy to apply to forward and/or include requests (e.g. spring.security.filter.dispatcher-types = request, error, async, forward, include). The application may forward or include the request to a higher privilege-secured endpoint.The application configures Spring Security to apply to every dispatcher type via authorizeHttpRequests().shouldFilterAllDispatcherTypes(true) |
| In Spring Boot versions 3.0.0 - 3.0.5, 2.7.0 - 2.7.10, and older unsupported versions, an application that is deployed to Cloud Foundry could be susceptible to a security bypass. Users of affected versions should apply the following mitigation: 3.0.x users should upgrade to 3.0.6+. 2.7.x users should upgrade to 2.7.11+. Users of older, unsupported versions should upgrade to 3.0.6+ or 2.7.11+. |
| Spring Tools 4 for Eclipse version 4.16.0 and below as well as VSCode extensions such as Spring Boot Tools, Concourse CI Pipeline Editor, Bosh Editor and Cloudfoundry Manifest YML Support version 1.39.0 and below all use Snakeyaml library for YAML editing support. This library allows for some special syntax in the YAML that under certain circumstances allows for potentially harmful remote code execution by the attacker. |
| 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. |
| 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. |
