CVE-2026-22739
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 · uneditedVulnerability in Spring Cloud when substituting the profile parameter from a request made to the Spring Cloud Config Server configured to the native file system as a backend, because it was possible to access files outside of the configured search directories.This issue affects Spring Cloud: from 3.1.X before 3.1.13, from 4.1.X before 4.1.9, from 4.2.X before 4.2.3, from 4.3.X before 4.3.2, from 5.0.X before 5.0.2.
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 confidencePath traversal vulnerability in Spring Cloud Config Server when using native file system backend. The profile parameter from requests is not properly validated, allowing attackers to access files outside configured search directories using directory traversal sequences (e.g., ../../).
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
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
- High
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify if Spring Cloud Config Server is deployedCheck for running Java processes with config server JAR, or look for config-server JAR/WAR files in the application directory. Check process list for 'spring-cloud-config-server' or review deployed artifacts.Affected if Spring Cloud Config Server is not present in the environment
-
Determine the installed Spring Cloud Config Server versionIf using a JAR file, check the manifest (jar tf manifest.mf or unzip -p) for Implementation-Version. If running, check the startup logs or /env endpoint for 'spring-cloud-config' version information.Affected if The version is before 3.1.13, 4.1.9, 4.2.3, 4.3.2, or 5.0.2 (or cannot be determined)
-
Verify native file system backend is in useReview application.properties or application.yml for 'spring.cloud.config.server.native' configuration. Look for 'spring.cloud.config.server.native.search-locations' property which indicates native file system backend.Affected if spring.cloud.config.server.native is enabled or spring.cloud.config.server.native.search-locations is configured
-
Check the configured search locationsExamine spring.cloud.config.server.native.search-locations in configuration files or runtime /env endpoint. Note the directories from which Config Server serves configuration files.Affected if Search locations are configured and the server uses native file system backend (vulnerable configuration)
-
Assess network exposure of the Config ServerReview network listeners, firewall rules, or load balancer configurations to determine if the Config Server REST endpoints are accessible from untrusted networks.Affected if Config Server HTTP endpoints are exposed to untrusted/unauthenticated network access
Environment is affected if running a vulnerable Spring Cloud Config Server version (before fixes listed) with native file system backend enabled and exposed to network access.
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 Spring Cloud to the fixed versions (3.1.13+, 4.1.9+, 4.2.3+, 4.3.2+, 5.0.2+) or implement strict input validation on the profile parameter to reject path traversal characters before applying the fix.
Spring Cloud 3.1.13+, 4.1.9+, 4.2.3+, 4.3.2+, or 5.0.2+ depending on your Spring Boot compatibility
- Identify your current Spring Cloud version by checking your dependency management (e.g., pom.xml, build.gradle)
- Determine which Spring Cloud branch is compatible with your Spring Boot version (Spring Cloud 2023.0.x requires Spring Boot 3.2+, 2022.0.x requires Spring Boot 3.0+, etc.)
- Upgrade to the minimum fixed version for your branch: for 3.1.x upgrade to 3.1.13+, for 4.1.x upgrade to 4.1.9+, for 4.2.x upgrade to 4.2.3+, for 4.3.x upgrade to 4.3.2+, for 5.0.x upgrade to 5.0.2+
- Update your dependency management file (pom.xml or build.gradle) with the new Spring Cloud version
- Rebuild and test your application to verify the upgrade works correctly
- Verify that the path traversal vulnerability is no longer present by testing that requests with '../' sequences in the profile parameter are rejected
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $3,328.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-22739 — 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-2026-22739 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