dbcve.org
Spring Security OauthFramework / library · Pivotal

CVE-2016-4977

HIGH · 8.8 CVSS v3.0 Published 2017-05-25
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
94/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
High EPSS Remotely reachable Zero-click

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 · unedited
When processing authorization requests using the whitelabel views in Spring Security OAuth 2.0.0 to 2.0.9 and 1.0.0 to 1.0.5, the response_type parameter value was executed as Spring SpEL which enabled a malicious user to trigger remote code execution via the crafting of the value for response_type.

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 confidence

This is a SpEL injection vulnerability in Spring Security OAuth2's whitelabel views. The response_type parameter from OAuth2 authorization requests is directly evaluated as a Spring Expression Language (SpEL) statement without sanitization, allowing attackers to execute arbitrary code by crafting malicious response_type values.

MitigationUpgrade to Spring Security OAuth 2.0.10+ or 1.0.6+ to receive the patch, or disable whitelabel views and implement custom approval pages that do not evaluate user input as SpEL expressions.

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
Spring Security OauthFramework / library
Affected:= 1.0.0= 1.0.1= 1.0.2= 1.0.3= 1.0.4= 1.0.5= 2.0.0= 2.0.1= 2.0.2= 2.0.3= 2.0.4= 2.0.5

CVSS 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
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify Spring Security OAuth2 version
    Check your project's dependency management (Maven pom.xml, Gradle build.gradle, or the spring-security-oauth2-version.jar manifest file) for the exact version of org.springframework.security.oauth:spring-security-oauth2
    Affected if The installed version is between 1.0.0 and 2.0.5 inclusive (or any version below 1.0.6 or 2.0.10)
  2. Confirm OAuth2 authorization endpoint is exposed
    Verify your application exposes the OAuth2 authorization endpoint at /oauth/authorize (check your controller mappings, security configuration, or attempt a request to the endpoint)
    Affected if The /oauth/authorize endpoint is accessible without additional authentication layers beyond what the vulnerability exploits
  3. Check if whitelabel error views are enabled
    Inspect your Spring Security OAuth2 configuration for the useDefaultSuccessUrl setting or look for the presence of whitelabel templates in your application resources (templates in src/main/resources/templates/ or default Spring error pages)
    Affected if Default whitelabel error pages are being used rather than custom approval pages that avoid SpEL evaluation of the response_type parameter
  4. Verify response_type parameter handling
    Examine the OAuth2 authorization flow - when a client sends a request with response_type=code (or other values) to /oauth/authorize, the whitelabel view directly evaluates this parameter as SpEL
    Affected if User-supplied response_type values from OAuth2 authorization requests are passed to the whitelabel view without sanitization

Your environment is affected if you run Spring Security OAuth2 version 1.0.0-2.0.5 with the OAuth2 authorization endpoint exposed and default whitelabel views enabled, allowing external response_type parameters to be evaluated as SpEL expressions.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Upgrade to Spring Security OAuth 2.0.10+ or 1.0.6+ to receive the patch, or disable whitelabel views and implement custom approval pages that do not evaluate user input as SpEL expressions.

Fix this in Spring Security Oauth Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
12.0 hours of engineering $2,130
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,408.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-4977 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2016-4977 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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