Spring Security (Spring Security 4.1.x before 4.1.5, 4.2.x before 4.2.4, and 5.0.x before 5.0.1; and Spring Framework 4.3.x before 4.3.14 and 5.0.x before 5.0.3) does not consider URL path parameters when processing security constraints. By adding a URL path parameter with special encodings, an attacker may be able to bypass a security constraint. The root cause of this issue is a lack of clarity regarding the handling of path parameters in the Servlet Specification. Some Servlet containers include path parameters in the value returned for getPathInfo() and some do not. Spring Security uses the value returned by getPathInfo() as part of the process of mapping requests to security constraints. In this particular attack, different character encodings used in path parameters allows secured Spring MVC static resource URLs to be bypassed.

Affected: Maven: org.springframework.security:spring-security-core, Maven: org.springframework:spring-core

Spring Security (Spring Security 4.1.x before 4.1.5, 4.2.x before 4.2.4, and 5.0.x before 5.0.1; and Spring Framework 4.3.x before 4.3.14 and 5.0.x before 5.0.3) does not consider URL path parameters when processing security constraints. By adding a URL path parameter with special encodings, an attacker may be able to bypass a security constraint. The root cause of this issue is a lack of clarity regarding the handling of path parameters in the Servlet Specification. Some Servlet containers include path parameters in the value returned for getPathInfo() and some do not. Spring Security uses the value returned by getPathInfo() as part of the process of mapping requests to security constraints. In this particular attack, different character encodings used in path parameters allows secured Spring MVC static resource URLs to be bypassed.

Spring Framework and Spring Security provided by Pivotal Software, Inc. contain an authentication bypass vulnerability. Macchinetta Framework Development Team : NTT COMWARE, NTT DATA Corporation, and NTT reported this vulnerability to IPA. JPCERT/CC coordinated with the developer under Information Security Early Warning Partnership.

spring-boot: Malicious PATCH requests submitted to servers can use specially crafted JSON data to run arbitrary Java code undertow: Client can use bogus uri in Digest authentication spring-framework: Improper URL path validation allows for bypassing of security checks on static resources ignite: Possible Execution of Arbitrary Code Within Deserialization Endpoints spark: Absolute and relative pathnames allow for unintended static file disclosure

Affected: Ubuntu:Pro:14.04:LTS: libspring-java, Ubuntu:Pro:16.04:LTS: libspring-java

Spring Security (Spring Security 4.1.x before 4.1.5, 4.2.x before 4.2.4, and 5.0.x before 5.0.1; and Spring Framework 4.3.x before 4.3.14 and 5.0.x before 5.0.3) does not consider URL path parameters when processing security constraints. By adding a URL path parameter with special encodings, an attacker may be able to bypass a security constraint. The root cause of this issue is a lack of clarity regarding the handling of path parameters in the Servlet Specification. Some Servlet containers include path parameters in the value returned for getPathInfo() and some do not. Spring Security uses the value returned by getPathInfo() as part of the process of mapping requests to security constraints. In this particular attack, different character encodings used in path parameters allows secured Spring MVC static resource URLs to be bypassed.

Ein Angreifer kann mehrere Schwachstellen in Dell Data Protection Advisor ausnutzen, um beliebigen Code auszuführen, einen Denial-of-Service-Zustand herbeizuführen, Dateien zu manipulieren, vertrauliche Informationen offenzulegen, seine Berechtigungen zu erweitern oder einen nicht spezifizierten Angriff durchzuführen.