CVE-2018-14667
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 RichFaces Framework 3.X through 3.3.4 is vulnerable to Expression Language (EL) injection via the UserResource resource. A remote, unauthenticated attacker could exploit this to execute arbitrary code using a chain of java serialized objects via org.ajax4jsf.resource.UserResource$UriData.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceThe RichFaces Framework versions 3.X through 3.3.4 contains an Expression Language (EL) injection vulnerability in the UserResource component (org.ajax4jsf.resource.UserResource$UriData). An unauthenticated remote attacker can exploit this by sending a chain of Java serialized objects to achieve arbitrary code execution on the target system.
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>= 3.1.0, <= 3.3.4= 5.0= 6.0CVSS 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
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Locate RichFaces libraries in the deploymentSearch for JAR files with the naming pattern richfaces*.jar in the application's lib directory, WEB-INF/lib folder, or application classpath. Common file names include richfaces-core.jar, richfaces-ui.jar, or earlier bundled variants.Affected if RichFaces JAR files are found in the deployment
-
Determine the installed RichFaces versionInspect the manifest file (META-INF/MANIFEST.MF) inside each located RichFaces JAR, or check the version attribute in any pom.xml or dependency management file if the application uses Maven. Look for the Specification-Version or Implementation-Version field.Affected if The version is greater than or equal to 3.1.0 and less than or equal to 3.3.4
-
Verify the UserResource component is presentSearch for the class org.ajax4jsf.resource.UserResource or its inner class UserResource$UriData within the RichFaces JAR files or compiled application bytecode.Affected if The UserResource class exists in the deployed RichFaces libraries
-
Check if the application exposes the vulnerable resource endpointReview web.xml configuration for servlet mappings or URL patterns that serve org.ajax4jsf.resource.UserResource. Also check if the application accepts serialized Java objects through HTTP requests.Affected if The application is configured to handle requests to the UserResource endpoint or accepts serialized object data from unauthenticated sources
A system is affected if RichFaces version 3.1.0 through 3.3.4 is deployed and the UserResource component is accessible to unauthenticated users.
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.
dbcve · scopedUpgrade from RichFaces 3.X to a supported version (4.X or later), or migrate to an alternative JSF component library, as RichFaces 3.X is end-of-life and no longer receives security updates.
Migrate from RichFaces 3.x to RichFaces 4.x or 5.x (e.g., RichFaces 4.5.x or 5.x series)
- 1. Identify all applications and dependencies using RichFaces 3.x (versions 3.1.0 through 3.3.4) in your environment.
- 2. Migrate application code from RichFaces 3.x to RichFaces 4.x or 5.x, as these versions do not contain the vulnerable UserResource component.
- 3. Update all RichFaces component references in your application to match the new API (note: RichFaces 4.x+ has significant API changes from 3.x).
- 4. Recompile and rebuild all application artifacts after the migration.
- 5. Test all application functionality thoroughly, as UI components and AJAX behaviors may behave differently in the new version.
- 6. If migration to RichFaces 4.x/5.x is not feasible, consider implementing network-level filtering to block external access to the UserResource endpoint (/org.ajax4jsf.resource/UserResource).
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,960.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-14667 — 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-2018-14667 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