A Spring MVC or Spring WebFlux application running on JDK 9+ may be vulnerable to remote code execution (RCE) via data binding. The specific exploit requires the application to run on Tomcat as a WAR deployment. If the application is deployed as a Spring Boot executable jar, i.e. the default, it is not vulnerable to the exploit. However, the nature of the vulnerability is more general, and there may be other ways to exploit it.

XStream is a simple library to serialize objects to XML and back again. In affected versions this vulnerability may allow a remote attacker has sufficient rights to execute commands of the host only by manipulating the processed input stream. No user is affected, who followed the recommendation to setup XStream's security framework with a whitelist limited to the minimal required types. XStream 1.4.18 uses no longer a blacklist by default, since it cannot be secured for general purpose.

In spring cloud gateway versions prior to 3.1.1+ and 3.0.7+ , applications are vulnerable to a code injection attack when the Gateway Actuator endpoint is enabled, exposed and unsecured. A remote attacker could make a maliciously crafted request that could allow arbitrary remote execution on the remote host.

A malicious actor who intentionally exploits this lack of effective limitation on the number of fetches performed when processing referrals can, through the use of specially crafted referrals, cause a recursing server to issue a very large number of fetches in an attempt to process the referral. This has at least two potential effects: The performance of the recursing server can potentially be degraded by the additional work required to perform these fetches, and The attacker can exploit this behavior to use the recursing server as a reflector in a reflection attack with a high amplification factor.

When curl >= 7.20.0 and <= 7.78.0 connects to an IMAP or POP3 server to retrieve data using STARTTLS to upgrade to TLS security, the server can respond and send back multiple responses at once that curl caches. curl would then upgrade to TLS but not flush the in-queue of cached responses but instead continue using and trustingthe responses it got *before* the TLS handshake as if they were authenticated.Using this flaw, it allows a Man-In-The-Middle attacker to first inject the fake responses, then pass-through the TLS traffic from the legitimate server and trick curl into sending data back to the user thinking the attacker's injected data comes from the TLS-protected server.

When using Apache Tomcat versions 10.0.0-M1 to 10.0.0-M4, 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.34, 8.5.0 to 8.5.54 and 7.0.0 to 7.0.103 if a) an attacker is able to control the contents and name of a file on the server; and b) the server is configured to use the PersistenceManager with a FileStore; and c) the PersistenceManager is configured with sessionAttributeValueClassNameFilter="null" (the default unless a SecurityManager is used) or a sufficiently lax filter to allow the attacker provided object to be deserialized; and d) the attacker knows the relative file path from the storage location used by FileStore to the file the attacker has control over; then, using a specifically crafted request, the attacker will be able to trigger remote code execution via deserialization of the file under their control. Note that all of conditions a) to d) must be true for the attack to succeed.

Certain DNSSEC aspects of the DNS protocol (in RFC 4033, 4034, 4035, 6840, and related RFCs) allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service (CPU consumption) via one or more DNSSEC responses, aka the "KeyTrap" issue. One of the concerns is that, when there is a zone with many DNSKEY and RRSIG records, the protocol specification implies that an algorithm must evaluate all combinations of DNSKEY and RRSIG records.

jackson-databind through 2.15.2 allows attackers to cause a denial of service or other unspecified impact via a crafted object that uses cyclic dependencies. NOTE: the vendor's perspective is that this is not a valid vulnerability report, because the steps of constructing a cyclic data structure and trying to serialize it cannot be achieved by an external attacker.

In BIND 9.5.0 -> 9.11.29, 9.12.0 -> 9.16.13, and versions BIND 9.11.3-S1 -> 9.11.29-S1 and 9.16.8-S1 -> 9.16.13-S1 of BIND Supported Preview Edition, as well as release versions 9.17.0 -> 9.17.1 of the BIND 9.17 development branch, BIND servers are vulnerable if they are running an affected version and are configured to use GSS-TSIG features. In a configuration which uses BIND's default settings the vulnerable code path is not exposed, but a server can be rendered vulnerable by explicitly setting values for the tkey-gssapi-keytab or tkey-gssapi-credential configuration options. Although the default configuration is not vulnerable, GSS-TSIG is frequently used in networks where BIND is integrated with Samba, as well as in mixed-server environments that combine BIND servers with Active Directory domain controllers. For servers that meet these conditions, the ISC SPNEGO implementation is vulnerable to various attacks, depending on the CPU architecture for which BIND was built: For named b…

In BIND 9.0.0 -> 9.11.29, 9.12.0 -> 9.16.13, and versions BIND 9.9.3-S1 -> 9.11.29-S1 and 9.16.8-S1 -> 9.16.13-S1 of BIND Supported Preview Edition, as well as release versions 9.17.0 -> 9.17.11 of the BIND 9.17 development branch, when a vulnerable version of named receives a query for a record triggering the flaw described above, the named process will terminate due to a failed assertion check. The vulnerability affects all currently maintained BIND 9 branches (9.11, 9.11-S, 9.16, 9.16-S, 9.17) as well as all other versions of BIND 9.