dbcve.org
BootplusApplication · Joeybling

CVE-2025-0704

MEDIUM · 5.3 CVSS v3.1 Published 2025-01-24
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to after 2020-08-24 or later.
See remediation →
62/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
Remotely reachable No privileges 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
A vulnerability, which was classified as problematic, was found in JoeyBling bootplus up to 247d5f6c209be1a5cf10cd0fa18e1d8cc63cf55d. Affected is the function qrCode of the file src/main/java/io/github/controller/QrCodeController.java. The manipulation of the argument w/h leads to resource consumption. It is possible to launch the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. This product is using a rolling release to provide continious delivery. Therefore, no version details for affected nor updated releases are available.

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 confidence

The vulnerability exists in the QrCodeController.java file where the qrCode function accepts w (width) and h (height) parameters without proper bounds validation. Attackers can supply excessively large values for these parameters, causing excessive memory allocation and CPU consumption during QR code generation, leading to denial of service.

MitigationImplement strict input validation on the w and h parameters to enforce maximum dimension limits (e.g., 1000x1000 pixels). Consider adding rate limiting and request timeouts to prevent resource exhaustion attacks.

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
BootplusApplication
Affected:<= 2020-08-24

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

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L

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 Joeybling Bootplus installation and version
    Locate the application JAR/WAR file or source code and determine the build date or version number. Check build artifacts, pom.xml, or manifest files for the version or build timestamp.
    Affected if The installed version is dated 2020-08-24 or earlier.
  2. Locate QrCodeController.java in the codebase
    Search the application source code or decompiled classes for the file QrCodeController.java or the class containing the qrCode function.
    Affected if The QrCodeController.java file exists and contains a qrCode function that accepts w and h parameters.
  3. Verify the qrCode function accepts width and height parameters
    Examine the qrCode function signature in QrCodeController.java. Look for method parameters named w, h, width, height, or similar that control QR code dimensions.
    Affected if The function accepts w and h parameters without documented or visible bounds validation.
  4. Inspect for input bounds validation on w and h parameters
    Review the qrCode function implementation to check if there are any validation checks that limit the maximum allowed values for w and h (for example, checks that reject values over 1000). Look for conditional statements, validation methods, or constant definitions that enforce dimension limits.
    Affected if No bounds validation exists, or the maximum allowed dimensions are either absent or set to excessively large values (e.g., no limit or limit above 2000 pixels).

You are affected if you are running Joeybling Bootplus dated 2020-08-24 or earlier and the QrCodeController qrCode function accepts w/h parameters without proper bounds validation.

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
Upgrade available Upgrade to a release after 2020-08-24
Interim mitigation

Implement strict input validation on the w and h parameters to enforce maximum dimension limits (e.g., 1000x1000 pixels). Consider adding rate limiting and request timeouts to prevent resource exhaustion attacks.

Fix this in Bootplus Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
13.0 hours of engineering $2,330
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,728.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-0704 — 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-2025-0704 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