CVE-2018-14925
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 · uneditedMatera Banco 1.0.0 mishandles Java errors in the backend, as demonstrated by a stack trace revealing use of net.sf.acegisecurity components.
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 · moderate confidenceMatera Banco 1.0.0 improperly handles Java exceptions, causing detailed stack traces to be exposed to end users. These stack traces reveal the use of net.sf.acegisecurity (an older Acegi Security library for Java), exposing internal application architecture, library versions, and potential attack surfaces.
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= 1.0.0CVSS 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:3.0/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.
-
Identify the installed Matera Banco versionCheck the application version information in the deployment manifest, WAR file metadata, or application properties/config files (e.g., version.properties, MANIFEST.MF in the WAR, or pom.xml if source is available)Affected if The version is exactly 1.0.0
-
Verify stack trace exposure in error responsesTrigger an invalid request or intentional error condition (such as submitting malformed input or accessing a non-existent resource) and capture the HTTP response body. Inspect whether Java exception stack traces are returned in the response.Affected if The response contains Java stack traces, exception class names, or detailed error messages revealing internal code paths
-
Detect net.sf.acegisecurity library presenceExamine the application's classpath, WEB-INF/lib directory (if WAR deployment), or build dependencies for the presence of net.sf.acegisecurity JAR files or references in configuration files (e.g., spring-security.xml, applicationContext-security.xml)Affected if The net.sf.acegisecurity library is found in the application deployment
If Matera Banco version 1.0.0 is deployed and HTTP error responses expose Java stack traces that reference internal classes or libraries, the environment is affected by this vulnerability.
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 dataImplement global exception handling to catch all uncaught exceptions and return generic user-friendly error messages instead of stack traces. Remove or upgrade the deprecated net.sf.acegisecurity library.
- 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-2018-14925 — 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-2018-14925 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