Spring Framework Security Filter Bypass in WebFlux Kotlin Router DSL
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Spring MVC and WebFlux applications are vulnerable to Denial of Service (DoS) 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.
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.
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 …
Spring MVC and WebFlux applications are vulnerable to cache poisoning when resolving static resources. More precisely, an application can be vulnerable when all the following are true:
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.
Spring MVC and WebFlux applications are vulnerable to stream corruption when using Server-Sent Events (SSE). This issue affects Spring Foundation: 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.
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.
Applications serving static resources through the functional web frameworks WebMvc.fn or WebFlux.fn are vulnerable to path traversal attacks. An attacker can craft malicious HTTP requests and obtain any file on the file system that is also accessible to the process in which the Spring application is running.
Applications serving static resources through the functional web frameworks WebMvc.fn or WebFlux.fn are vulnerable to path traversal attacks. An attacker can craft malicious HTTP requests and obtain any file on the file system that is also accessible to the process in which the Spring application is running. Specifically, an application is vulnerable when both of the following are true: the web application uses RouterFunctions to serve static resources resource handling …
Spring Framework prior to versions 5.2.20 and 5.3.18 contains a remote code execution vulnerability known as Spring4Shell.
Spring Framework WebFlux applications are 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 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, 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 is vulnerable to CSRF attacks through CORS preflight requests that target Spring MVC (spring-webmvc module) or Spring WebFlux (spring-webflux module) endpoints.
Spring Framework provides support for range requests when serving static resources through the ResourceHttpRequestHandler. A malicious user (or attacker) can add a range header with a high number of ranges, or with wide ranges that overlap, or both, for a denial of service attack.
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 …