CVE-2025-10771
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 · uneditedA vulnerability was determined in jeecgboot JimuReport up to 2.1.2. Affected is an unknown function of the file /drag/onlDragDataSource/testConnection of the component DB2 JDBC Handler. Executing manipulation of the argument clientRerouteServerListJNDIName can lead to deserialization. The attack can be executed remotely. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized.
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 JimuReport component in jeecgboot contains a deserialization vulnerability in the DB2 JDBC Handler's testConnection endpoint (/drag/onlDragDataSource/testConnection). The clientRerouteServerListJNDIName parameter is not properly sanitized before deserialization, allowing remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via crafted serialized objects.
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<= 2.1.2CVSS 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.
-
Identify if JeecgBoot or JimuReport is deployedLocate the Java web application WAR or exploded directory. Check for jeecg-boot or jimureport in file names, class paths, or libraries.Affected if The application is a JeecgBoot-based system using the JimuReport module.
-
Determine the installed JimuReport versionSearch for version information in pom.xml, MANIFEST.MF, or version properties files within the deployed application. Look for files containing 'jimureport' or 'JimuReport' with version numbers.Affected if The version is 2.1.2 or lower.
-
Verify the vulnerable endpoint existsCheck if the REST endpoint /drag/onlDragDataSource/testConnection is present in the deployed application by examining the compiled classes or examining web.xml URL mappings. This endpoint handles onlDragDataSource connection testing.Affected if The endpoint is accessible in the running application.
-
Check if DB2 JDBC datasource configuration is enabledInspect application configuration files (application.yml, application.properties, or database config files) for DB2 datasource definitions. The vulnerability affects the clientRerouteServerListJNDIName parameter in DB2 JDBC handler configuration.Affected if DB2 JDBC datasource with clientRerouteServerListJNDIName parameter support is configured or available.
-
Confirm network accessibility of the testConnection endpointIf the application is running, verify whether the /drag/onlDragDataSource/testConnection endpoint is reachable via HTTP/HTTPS from the network.Affected if The endpoint is exposed over the network without authentication or additional access controls.
You are affected if you are running JeecgBoot with JimuReport version 2.1.2 or lower and the /drag/onlDragDataSource/testConnection endpoint is accessible with DB2 JDBC handler configuration enabled.
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 JimuReport to a version beyond 2.1.2 that includes the patched DB2 JDBC Handler. If immediate patching is not feasible, disable or restrict network access to the affected /drag/onlDragDataSource/testConnection endpoint.
latest version beyond 2.1.2 (check official jeecgboot releases)
- 1. Identify all deployments of JimuReport version 2.1.2 or earlier in your environment
- 2. Upgrade JimuReport to the latest available version from the official jeecgboot repository (https://github.com/jeecgboot/JimuReport)
- 3. After upgrading, verify the /drag/onlDragDataSource/testConnection endpoint is no longer vulnerable by testing with the clientRerouteServerListJNDIName parameter
- 4. If immediate upgrade is not possible, restrict network access to the affected endpoint using firewall rules or API gateway filtering
- 5. Disable or remove the DB2 JDBC Handler component if not required in your deployment
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing5.0 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 $4,464.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-10771 — 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-2025-10771 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