TomcatWeb server / proxy · Apache
CVE-2017-7675
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 · uneditedThe HTTP/2 implementation in Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M21 and 8.5.0 to 8.5.15 bypassed a number of security checks that prevented directory traversal attacks. It was therefore possible to bypass security constraints using a specially crafted URL.
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 confidenceThe HTTP/2 implementation in Apache Tomcat 9.0.0.M1 to 9.0.0.M21 and 8.5.0 to 8.5.15 bypassed security checks designed to prevent directory traversal attacks, allowing attackers to bypass security constraints via specially crafted URLs.
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
TomcatWeb server / proxy
= 8.5.0= 8.5.1= 8.5.2= 8.5.3= 8.5.4= 8.5.5= 8.5.6= 8.5.7= 8.5.8= 8.5.9= 8.5.10= 8.5.11CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/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 installed Apache Tomcat versionCheck the RELEASE-NOTES file in the Tomcat installation directory, or run: java -cp $CATALINA_HOME/lib/catalina.jar org.apache.catalina.util.ServerInfo 2>/dev/null | grep 'Server version'Affected if Version is 8.5.0 through 8.5.15, or 9.0.0.M1 through 9.0.0.M21
-
Determine if HTTP/2 protocol is enabledInspect the server.xml configuration file in the Tomcat conf directory. Look for Connector definitions with protocol="h2" or protocol="org.apache.coyote.http2.Http2Protocol"Affected if An HTTP/2 connector is defined and active on the server
-
Verify security constraint configurationReview the web.xml file and any custom security constraint definitions in application WEB-INF/web.xml to understand what paths are protectedAffected if Security constraints exist that should prevent directory traversal but may be bypassed via HTTP/2
-
Check for traversal pattern filteringInspect any custom security valves, servlet filters, or web application firewall configurations that may inspect request paths for traversal patterns (../)Affected if No additional path validation exists beyond the built-in Tomcat security constraints
The environment is affected if Tomcat version 8.5.0-8.5.15 or 9.0.0.M1-9.0.0.M21 is running with an active HTTP/2 connector, as this specific combination allows the directory traversal bypass to succeed.
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 Tomcat 9.0.0.M22 or later, or 8.5.16 or later. If immediate patching is not possible, consider disabling HTTP/2 or implementing additional web application firewall rules to filter traversal patterns.
Fix this in Tomcat
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,464.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-7675 — 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-2017-7675 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