CVE-2025-11143
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 Jetty URI parser has some key differences to other common parsers when evaluating invalid or unusual URIs. Differential parsing of URIs in systems using multiple components may result in security by-pass. For example a component that enforces a black list may interpret the URIs differently from one that generates a response. At the very least, differential parsing may divulge implementation details.
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 confidenceJetty's URI parser interprets invalid or unusual URIs differently than other parsers used in the same application. This differential parsing can allow security bypasses—for example, a blacklist enforced by one component may be circumvented because another component (like the response generator) parses the same URI differently, potentially revealing implementation details or permitting access controls to be evaded.
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>= 9.4.0, <= 9.4.58>= 10.0.0, <= 10.0.26>= 11.0.0, <= 11.0.26>= 12.0.0, < 12.0.31>= 12.1.0, < 12.1.5CVSS 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
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/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 Jetty version in useCheck the Jetty JAR files in your deployment (typically in the lib/jetty-*.jar naming convention) or examine the classpath. Run: ls lib/ | grep jetty or check your dependency manifest for jetty-version.txtAffected if The version falls within any of these ranges: 9.4.0-9.4.58, 10.0.0-10.0.26, 11.0.0-11.0.26, 12.0.0-12.0.30, 12.1.0-12.1.4
-
Determine if your application uses URI-based security filtersReview your web.xml, security constraint definitions, or any Filter/Interceptor implementations that perform URI-based allowlists or blocklists. Search code for Request.getRequestURI(), HttpServletRequest.getPathInfo(), or similar URI retrieval methods used in security logic.Affected if Security logic relies on URI parsing and multiple components (e.g., a proxy, a servlet filter, and the application code) handle the same request URI differently.
-
Test for differential URI parsing with edge case charactersSend test requests with unusual URI characters (e.g., /../, /%2e%2e/, //, /%00/, null bytes, encoded slashes %2f) to endpoints protected by URI-based rules and observe if access is inconsistently granted or denied across different code paths.Affected if Different components interpret the same URI differently - for example, a security filter blocks a request but the underlying servlet handles it, or vice versa.
-
Audit URI-handling dependenciesList all libraries that parse URIs in your application (e.g., Spring, Apache HttpClient, JAX-RS implementations) and verify whether they use the same URI parsing logic as Jetty's HttpURI class.Affected if Your application stack combines Jetty with other URI-parsing libraries that may produce different parsing results for the same input.
You are affected if you run a Jetty version within the affected ranges and your application relies on URI-based access controls or contains components that parse URIs inconsistently with Jetty's parser.
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 · scoped12.0.3112.1.5
Update Jetty to the version that includes the URI parser fix. Audit all components that handle URIs to ensure consistent parsing behavior across the application stack.
Jetty 9.4.59+ (for 9.4.x), 10.0.27+ (for 10.0.x), 11.0.27+ (for 11.0.x), or 12.0.31+ (for 12.0.x)
- 1. Identify the exact Jetty version currently deployed in your environment
- 2. Determine which Jetty major version line you are using (9.x, 10.x, 11.x, or 12.x)
- 3. Download the corresponding fixed release for your version line from the official Eclipse Jetty releases (eclipse.org/jetty or github.com/eclipse/jetty.project)
- 4. Review the release notes for your target fixed version to identify any configuration or behavioral changes
- 5. Update your project's dependency management (Maven, Gradle, etc.) to specify the fixed Jetty version
- 6. Test the upgrade in a staging environment before deploying to production
- 7. Deploy the updated Jetty version to production
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing10.0 h
- Review / QA6.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $9,504.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-11143 — 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-2025-11143 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