TikaApplication · Apache
CVE-2015-3271
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedApache Tika server (aka tika-server) in Apache Tika 1.9 might allow remote attackers to read arbitrary files via the HTTP fileUrl header.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceApache Tika server 1.9 contains a path traversal vulnerability allowing remote attackers to read arbitrary files by manipulating the HTTP fileUrl header. The server processes the header value directly without proper sanitization, enabling directory traversal sequences (e.g., ../../etc/passwd) to access sensitive files outside the intended directory.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data
TikaApplication
= 1.9CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify if Apache Tika server is runningLook for Java processes running Tika server: on Linux use 'ps aux | grep -i tika' or check for listening ports (typically 9998). On Windows, check for javaw.exe processes with Tika in the command line.Affected if A Tika server process is found running on the system
-
Determine the installed Tika versionCheck the Tika server version by inspecting the running service or JAR file. If accessible via HTTP, send a GET request to the root endpoint to retrieve server information, or check the JAR filename and metadata for version 1.9.Affected if The installed version is exactly 1.9 (note: only version = 1.9 is affected)
-
Verify the fileUrl endpoint is accessibleCheck if the Tika server has the fileUrl endpoint enabled and accessible. This is typically a POST endpoint that accepts a fileUrl header parameter.Affected if The fileUrl endpoint is available and accepts requests
-
Check network exposure of the Tika serviceDetermine if the Tika server is listening on a network interface accessible to untrusted users (not localhost-only). Check the binding address in the server configuration or running process.Affected if The Tika server is bound to a non-localhost address or exposed to untrusted networks
You are affected if Apache Tika server version 1.9 is running and the fileUrl endpoint is accessible over the network, allowing remote attackers to manipulate the fileUrl header for directory traversal.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataUpgrade to Apache Tika 1.10 or later, which contains the fix for proper input validation on the fileUrl parameter. If upgrading is not immediately feasible, implement web application firewall rules or proxy-level filtering to block directory traversal patterns in the fileUrl header.
Fix this in Tika
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2015-3271 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2015-3271 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data