A Spring WebFlux application that relies on the Aalto XML processor to parse XML input does not correctly enforce the maxInMemorySize limit. Spring Framework 7.0.0 - 7.0.8 Spring Framework 6.2.0 - 6.2.19 Spring Framework 6.1.0 - 6.1.28 Spring Framework 6.0.0 - 6.0.30 Spring Framework 5.3.0 - 5.3.49 Spring Framework 5.2.25.RELEASE and earlier

Spring Framework applications that use Spring's data binding infrastructure to apply user-supplied property paths onto a target object may be vulnerable to a Denial of Service (DoS) attack. Spring Framework 7.0.0 - 7.0.8 Spring Framework 6.2.0 - 6.2.19 Spring Framework 6.1.0 - 6.1.28 Spring Framework 6.0.0 - 6.0.30 Spring Framework 5.3.0 - 5.3.49 Spring Framework 5.2.25.RELEASE and earlier

Spring MVC and WebFlux applications that obtain a data-binding Errors instance with HTML escaping enabled and then render field errors using the no-argument Errors.getFieldErrors() or Errors.getFieldError() accessors are vulnerable to arbitrary HTML/JavaScript code injection, potentially resulting in a reflected cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability. Spring Framework 7.0.0 - 7.0.8 Spring Framework 6.2.0 - 6.2.19 Spring Framework 6.1.0 - 6.1.28 Spring Framework 6.0.0 - 6.0.30 Spring Framework 5.3.0 - 5.3.49 Spring Framework 5.2.25.RELEASE and earlier

IDs for WebSocket sessions in the spring-websocket module are not cryptographically unpredictable, which may be possible to exploit in combination with inadequate authorization rules.

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.

A WebFlux application using functional endpoints and deployed with DispatcherServlet may be vulnerable to a header predicate bypass in a pre-flight request. Spring Framework 7.0.0 - 7.0.8 Spring Framework 6.2.0 - 6.2.19 Spring Framework 6.1.0 - 6.1.28 Spring Framework 6.0.0 - 6.0.30 Spring Framework 5.3.0 - 5.3.49 Spring Framework 5.2.5.RELEASE - 5.2.25.RELEASE

A Spring WebFlux application that supports WebSocket connections may expose indirectly sensitive user information by including request headers in an exception reason. Spring Framework 7.0.0 - 7.0.8 Spring Framework 6.2.0 - 6.2.19 Spring Framework 6.1.0 - 6.1.28 Spring Framework 6.0.0 - 6.0.30 Spring Framework 5.3.0 - 5.3.49 Spring Framework 5.2.25.RELEASE and earlier

Applications using Spring Framework's FreeMarker integration may be vulnerable to a path traversal attack when a controller returns a view name derived from untrusted input and FreeMarker is configured to resolve templates through SpringTemplateLoader. Spring Framework 7.0.0 - 7.0.8 Spring Framework 6.2.0 - 6.2.19 Spring Framework 6.1.0 - 6.1.28 Spring Framework 6.0.0 - 6.0.30 Spring Framework 5.3.0 - 5.3.49 Spring Framework 5.2.25.RELEASE and earlier

Applications that build a Content-Disposition header value from untrusted input may be vulnerable to HTTP response splitting when the input is a malicious file name. Spring Framework 7.0.0 - 7.0.8 Spring Framework 6.2.0 - 6.2.19 Spring Framework 6.1.0 - 6.1.28 Spring Framework 6.0.0 - 6.0.30 Spring Framework 5.3.0 - 5.3.49 Spring Framework 5.2.25.RELEASE and earlier

Applications that evaluate Spring Expression Language (SpEL) expressions using SimpleEvaluationContext may be vulnerable to a safety guard bypass when the SpEL expression compiler is active. Spring Framework 7.0.0 - 7.0.8 Spring Framework 6.2.0 - 6.2.19 Spring Framework 6.1.0 - 6.1.28 Spring Framework 6.0.0 - 6.0.30 Spring Framework 5.3.0 - 5.3.49 Spring Framework 5.2.25.RELEASE and earlier

In an untrusted JMS environment, org.springframework.jms.support.converter.MappingJackson2MessageConverter and org.springframework.jms.support.converter.JacksonJsonMessageConverter allow arbitrary class instantiation, which can lead to unauthorized actions via gadget class deserialization.

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.

Due to incorrect host parsing, applications that rely on UriComponentsBuilder to parse and validate an externally provided URL string may be exposed to a server-side request forgery (SSRF) attack.

Affected versions: Spring Framework 7.0.0 through 7.0.7; 6.2.0 through 6.2.18.

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 applications using the functional web framework are vulnerable to stream corruption when using Server-Sent Events (SSE). Spring Framework 7.0.0 - 7.0.8 Spring Framework 6.2.0 - 6.2.19 Spring Framework 6.1.0 - 6.1.28 Spring Framework 6.0.0 - 6.0.30 Spring Framework 5.3.0 - 5.3.49

A Spring MVC application that uses UrlFileNameViewController that is mapped with an end-of-path, and does not have a configured prefix is vulnerable to an open redirect. Spring Framework 7.0.0 - 7.0.8 Spring Framework 6.2.0 - 6.2.19 Spring Framework 6.1.0 - 6.1.28 Spring Framework 6.0.0 - 6.0.30 Spring Framework 5.3.0 - 5.3.49 Spring Framework 5.2.25.RELEASE and earlier

Applications that evaluate user-supplied Spring Expression Language (SpEL) expressions may be vulnerable to a Denial of Service (DoS) attack when the power operator (^) is used with a BigDecimal or BigInteger operand and a large exponent value. Spring Framework 7.0.0 - 7.0.8 Spring Framework 6.2.0 - 6.2.19 Spring Framework 6.1.0 - 6.1.28 Spring Framework 6.0.0 - 6.0.30 Spring Framework 5.3.0 - 5.3.49 Spring Framework 5.2.25.RELEASE and earlier

A WebFlux application running on the Jetty 12 Core reactive adapter serializes response cookies without the sameSite attribute. Spring Framework 7.0.0 - 7.0.8 Spring Framework 6.2.0 - 6.2.19

Use of XsltView in a Spring MVC application can result in SSRF and RCE attack if the application has an "/" mapping that results in view rendering, and where the view name is not explicitly specified. Spring Framework 7.0.0 - 7.0.8 Spring Framework 6.2.0 - 6.2.19 Spring Framework 6.1.0 - 6.1.28 Spring Framework 6.0.0 - 6.0.30 Spring Framework 5.3.0 - 5.3.49 Spring Framework 5.2.25.RELEASE and earlier

The PartEventHttpMessageReader in Spring WebFlux does not enforce the maxPartSize limit when maxInMemorySize is set to -1. Spring Framework 7.0.0 - 7.0.8 Spring Framework 6.2.0 - 6.2.19 Spring Framework 6.1.0 - 6.1.28

A Spring RSocket application is exposed to a memory leak via a malformed SETUP frame. Spring Framework 7.0.0 - 7.0.8 Spring Framework 6.2.0 - 6.2.19 Spring Framework 6.1.0 - 6.1.28 Spring Framework 6.0.0 - 6.0.30 Spring Framework 5.3.0 - 5.3.49 Spring Framework 5.2.0.RELEASE - 5.2.25.RELEASE

UrlHandlerFilter can be vulnerable to an open redirect when configured with very broadly matching patterns. The issue applies to the filter variants in both Spring MVC and Spring WebFlux. Spring Framework 7.0.0 - 7.0.8 Spring Framework 6.2.0 - 6.2.19

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 is explicitly configured with a FileSystemResource location

However, malicious requests are blocked and rejected when any of the following is true:

the Spring Security HTTP Firewall https://docs.spring.io/spring-security/reference/servlet/exploits/firewall.html is in use the application runs on Tomcat or Jetty

CVE-2024-38820 ensured Locale-independent, lowercase conversion for both the configured disallowedFields patterns and for request parameter names. However, there are still cases where it is possible to bypass the disallowedFields checks.

Affected Spring Products and Versions

Spring Framework: 6.2.0 - 6.2.6

6.1.0 - 6.1.19

6.0.0 - 6.0.27

5.3.0 - 5.3.42 Older, unsupported versions are also affected

Mitigation

Users of affected versions should upgrade to the corresponding fixed version.

| Affected version(s) | Fix Version | Availability | | - | - | - | | 6.2.x | 6.2.7 | OSS | | 6.1.x | 6.1.20 | OSS | | 6.0.x | 6.0.28 | Commercial https://enterprise.spring.io/ | | 5.3.x | 5.3.43 | Commercial https://enterprise.spring.io/ |

No further mitigation steps are necessary.

Generally, we recommend using a dedicated model object with properties only for data binding, or using constructor binding since constructor arguments explicitly declare what to bind together with turning off setter binding through the declarativeBinding flag. See the Model Design section in the reference documentation.

For setting binding, prefer the use of allowedFields (an explicit list) over disallowedFields.

Credit

This issue was responsibly reported by the TERASOLUNA Framework Development Team from NTT DATA Group Corporation.

The Spring Framework annotation detection mechanism may not correctly resolve annotations on methods within type hierarchies with a parameterized super type with unbounded generics. This can be an issue if such annotations are used for authorization decisions.

Your application may be affected by this if you are using Spring Security's @EnableMethodSecurity feature.

You are not affected by this if you are not using @EnableMethodSecurity or if you do not use security annotations on methods in generic superclasses or generic interfaces.

This CVE is published in conjunction with CVE-2025-41248 https://spring.io/security/cve-2025-41248 .

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 Framework MVC applications can be vulnerable to a “Path Traversal Vulnerability” when deployed on a non-compliant Servlet container.

An application can be vulnerable when all the following are true:

the application is deployed as a WAR or with an embedded Servlet container the Servlet container does not reject suspicious sequences