VMware Spring Framework

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 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, 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.

Pivotal Spring Framework through 5.3.16 suffers from a potential remote code execution (RCE) issue if used for Java deserialization of untrusted data. Depending on how the library is implemented within a product, this issue may or not occur, and authentication may be required. NOTE: the vendor's position is that untrusted data is not an intended use case. The product's behavior will not be changed because some users rely on deserialization of trusted data.

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.

Spring Framework Improper Path Limitation in XsltView

Spring Framework Server Sent Event stream corruption while rendering fragments

Server Sent Event stream corruption in Spring MVC functional web framework

Spring Framework Header Predicate Bypass in WebFlux Functional Endpoints

Spring Framework maxInMemorySize Bypassed in Jaxb2Decoder

Spring Framework Unsafe Deserialization via Jackson JMS Converters

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.

Spring Framework Safety Guard Bypass via SpEL Expression Compilation

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.

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.

RFD Protection Bypass via jsessionid

CVE-2024-22259: Spring Framework URL Parsing with Host Validation (2nd report)

RFD Attack via "Content-Disposition" Header Sourced from Request Input by Spring MVC or Spring WebFlux Application

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.

DoS Attack via Range Requests

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.

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.

Spring Framework, versions 5.0.x prior to 5.0.7 and 4.3.x prior to 4.3.18 and older unsupported versions, allows web applications to enable cross-domain requests via JSONP (JSON with Padding) through AbstractJsonpResponseBodyAdvice for REST controllers and MappingJackson2JsonView for browser requests. Both are not enabled by default in Spring Framework nor Spring Boot, however, when MappingJackson2JsonView is configured in an application, JSONP support is automatically ready to use through the "jsonp" and "callback" JSONP parameters, enabling cross-domain requests.

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.

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.

Spring Framework server Web Observations DoS Vulnerability

CVE-2024-22233: Spring Framework server Web DoS Vulnerability

Spring Framework Denial of Service via Unbounded Exponentiation in SpEL Expressions

Spring Framework Denial of Service via Unbounded Cache in SpEL

Spring Framework Algorithmic Denial of Service via SpEL Expressions

Spring Framework Memory Leak via SETUP Frame in RSocketMessageHandler

Spring Framework Denial of Service via Versioned Resources in Spring MVC and WebFlux

Spring Framework Denial of Service via Unbounded List Growth in Data Binding

Spring Framework Denial of Service via Integer Overflow in SpEL Expressions

Spring Framework sameSite Attribute Dropped in JettyCoreServerHttpResponse

Spring Framework Request Headers Included in Exception Reasons in HandshakeWebsocketService

Spring Framework Denial of Service via AntPathMatcher

Spring Framework maxPartSize Ignored in PartEventHttpMessageReader

Spring Framework Predictable Session ID in WebSocket Module

Authorization Bypass During JWT Issuer Validation with spring-security