TapestryApplication · Apache
CVE-2019-0207
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 · uneditedTapestry processes assets `/assets/ctx` using classes chain `StaticFilesFilter -> AssetDispatcher -> ContextResource`, which doesn't filter the character `\`, so attacker can perform a path traversal attack to read any files on Windows platform.
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 Tapestry framework contains a path traversal vulnerability in its asset processing chain (StaticFilesFilter -> AssetDispatcher -> ContextResource). The asset handler at /assets/ctx fails to filter backslash characters, allowing attackers to use \..\ patterns to traverse directories and read arbitrary files on Windows systems.
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
TapestryApplication
>= 5.4.0, <= 5.4.4CVSS 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:3.1/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 Apache Tapestry versionLocate the tapestry-core JAR file in your application lib or classpath and check its version, or look in your build configuration (pom.xml, build.gradle) for the tapestry.version propertyAffected if version is >= 5.4.0 and <= 5.4.4
-
Confirm application runs on WindowsCheck the operating system where the application server or servlet container is hosted using 'systeminfo' on Windows or checking environment variablesAffected if the host OS is Windows (vulnerability only affects Windows systems)
-
Verify asset serving is enabledCheck the application web.xml or Tapestry configuration for StaticFilesFilter or AssetDispatcher filter definitions, and confirm the /assets/ path is accessibleAffected if StaticFilesFilter and AssetDispatcher are configured and the /assets/ path is accessible via HTTP
-
Test for path traversal vulnerabilitySend an HTTP GET request to /assets/ctx\..\WEB-INF\web.xml (or similar path using backslash traversal) and check if the response returns file contents instead of a 404 errorAffected if the request returns file contents from outside the intended assets directory
A user is affected if they run Apache Tapestry version 5.4.0 through 5.4.4 on Windows with asset serving enabled and the /assets/ endpoint responds with file contents when given backslash traversal patterns.
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 dataApply the vendor patch to filter or reject backslash characters in the asset processing pipeline, or upgrade to a patched version of Apache Tapestry.
Fix this in Tapestry
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-0207 — 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-2019-0207 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