Page 3 of 14 results (0.023 seconds)

CVSS: 6.5EPSS: 0%CPEs: 71EXPL: 0

Spring Framework, versions 5.0.x prior to 5.0.6, versions 4.3.x prior to 4.3.17, and older unsupported versions allows 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 regular expression, denial of service attack. Spring Framework, en versiones 5.0.x anteriores a la 5.0.6, versiones 4.3.x anteriores a la 4.3.17 y versiones antiguas no soportadas, permite que las aplicaciones expongan STOMP sobre los endpoints WebSocket con un simple broker STOP dentro de la memoria a través del módulo spring-messaging. Un usuario (o atacante) malicioso puede crear un mensaje para el broker que puede conducir a un ataque de denegación de servicio (DoS) de expresión regular. • http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpuoct2018-4428296.html http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/104260 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:1809 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:3768 https://pivotal.io/security/cve-2018-1257 https://www.oracle.com/security-alerts/cpujan2020.html https://www.oracle.com/security-alerts/cpujul2020.html https://www.oracle.com/security-alerts/cpuoct2021.html https://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpuapr2019-5072813.html ht • CWE-200: Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor •

CVSS: 9.8EPSS: 76%CPEs: 70EXPL: 4

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, en versiones 5.0 anteriores a la 5.0.5 y versiones 4.3 anteriores a la 4.3.15, así como versiones más antiguas no soportadas, permite que las aplicaciones expongan STOMP en endpoints WebSocket con un simple agente STOMP en memoria a través del módulo spring-messaging. Un usuario (o atacante) malicioso puede manipular un mensaje al agente que desemboca en un ataque de ejecución remota de código. Pivotal Spring Java Framework versions 5.0.x and below suffer from a remote code execution vulnerability. • https://github.com/CaledoniaProject/CVE-2018-1270 https://github.com/Venscor/CVE-2018-1270 https://github.com/tafamace/CVE-2018-1270 http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpujul2018-4258247.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpuoct2018-4428296.html http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/103696 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:2939 https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4ed49b103f64a0cecb38064f26cbf1389afc12124653da2d35166dbe%40%3Cissues.activemq.apache.org%3E https://lists& • CWE-20: Improper Input Validation CWE-94: Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection') CWE-358: Improperly Implemented Security Check for Standard •

CVSS: 7.5EPSS: 0%CPEs: 66EXPL: 0

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. Tanto en Spring Security versiones 3.2.x, 4.0.x, 4.1.0 como el Framework Spring versiones 3.2.x, 4.0.x, 4.1.x, 4.2.x, se basan en el mapeo de patrones de URL para la autorización y para mapear las peticiones hacia los controladores, respectivamente. Las diferencias en el rigor de los mecanismos de coincidencia de patrones, por ejemplo con respecto al recorte de espacio en los segmentos de ruta (path), pueden hacer que Spring Security no reconozca ciertas rutas (paths) como no protegidas que de hecho se asignan a los controladores MVC de Spring que deben protegerse. • http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpuapr2018-3678067.html http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/91687 https://pivotal.io/security/cve-2016-5007 https://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpujul2019-5072835.html • CWE-264: Permissions, Privileges, and Access Controls •

CVSS: 7.5EPSS: 0%CPEs: 32EXPL: 0

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. Un problema fue descubierto en Pivotal Spring Framework en versiones anteriores a 3.2.18, 4.2.x en versiones anteriores a 4.2.9 y 4.3.x en versiones anteriores a 4.3.5. Las rutas proporcionadas al ResourceServlet no fueron desinfectadas adecuadamente y como resultado expuestas a ataques de salto de directorio. It was found that ResourceServlet in Spring Framework does not sanitize the paths that have been provided properly. • http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpuapr2018-3678067.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpujan2018-3236628.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/security-advisory/cpujul2018-4258247.html http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/95072 http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1040698 https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017:3115 https://lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2019/07/msg00012.html https://pivotal.io/security/cve-2016-9878 https://security.netapp.com/adviso • CWE-22: Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal') •