Spring: Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory
CVE-2024-38816 is a high-severity improper limitation of a pathname to a restricted directory vulnerability in Spring, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.5 out of 10. It can be exploited remotely over the network by an unauthenticated attacker, without any action from a user. The record lists versions 5.3.40, 6.0.24, 6.1.13 as the first without the flaw, so updating Spring to one of those releases or later removes the exposure. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 21.3% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is in the top 2.36% of all scored CVEs.
EPSS places it among the vulnerabilities most likely to be exploited soon.
What to do
- Update Spring to 5.3.40 or 6.0.24 or 6.1.13, whichever matches your release line, or a later version.
- Update spring_framework to 5.3.40 or 6.0.24 or 6.1.13, whichever matches your release line, or a later version.
- Until you can update, restrict network access to the affected service so it is not reachable from untrusted networks.
Affected products and versions
| Vendor | Product | Affected versions | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| Spring | Spring | 5.3.x up to, but not including, 5.3.40; 6.0.x up to, but not including, 6.0.24; 6.1.x up to, but not including, 6.1.13 | 5.3.40, 6.0.24, 6.1.13 |
| Spring By Vmware Tanzu | spring_framework | 5.3.0 up to, but not including, 5.3.40; 6.0.0 up to, but not including, 6.0.24; 6.1.0 up to, but not including, 6.1.13 | 5.3.40, 6.0.24, 6.1.13 |
Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.
How the severity score breaks down
- Attack vector
- NetworkCan be exploited remotely over a network, including the internet.
- Attack complexity
- LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
- Privileges required
- NoneNo account or login is needed.
- User interaction
- NoneNo action by a victim is required.
- Scope
- UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
- Confidentiality
- HighAll data handled by the component can be read.
- Integrity
- NoneNothing can be modified.
- Availability
- NoneAvailability is not affected.
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N. Scored by CNA (vmware.com).
Official description
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
Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.
The underlying weakness: Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory
The product uses external input to construct a pathname that is intended to identify a file or directory that is located underneath a restricted parent directory, but the product does not properly neutralize special elements within the pathname that can cause the pathname to resolve to a location that is outside of the restricted directory.
How developers prevent this class of flaw
- For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
- Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
- Use an application firewall that can detect attacks against this weakness. It can be beneficial in cases in which the code cannot be fixed (because it is controlled by a third party), as an emergency prevention measure while more comprehensive software assurance measures are applied, or to provide defense in depth.
More Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory vulnerabilities (CWE-22)
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: yes, technical impact: partial).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Other vulnerabilities in Spring
- 9.1 Critical severity
Recent Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory vulnerabilities
- 9.8 Critical severity
- 9.8 Critical severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
- 7.5 High severity
- 7.8 High severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.