dbcve.org
Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF)Weakness · CWE-918

CVE-2026-40999

HIGH · 8.6 CVSS v3.1 Published 2026-06-11
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
95/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
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
When WS-Addressing is used with non-anonymous ReplyTo or FaultTo addresses, Spring WS may initiate outbound connections through configured WebServiceMessageSender instances to destinations taken directly from request headers without verifying that those destinations are safe to connect to. Affected versions: Spring Web Services 5.0.0 through 5.0.1; 4.1.0 through 4.1.3; 4.0.0 through 4.0.18; 3.1.0 through 3.1.8.

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 confidence

Spring WS processes WS-Addressing headers (ReplyTo, FaultTo) and uses the contained addresses as destinations for outbound WebServiceMessageSender connections without validating them, leading to Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF). An attacker can supply malicious addresses in these headers to make the server connect to arbitrary internal or external destinations.

MitigationImplement allowlist-based validation for ReplyTo/FaultTo addresses before use in outbound connections, or upgrade to a patched Spring WS version if available.

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
Changed
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
None
Availability
None

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Verify Spring Web Services is in use
    Inspect project dependencies (pom.xml, build.gradle) or deployed application libraries for spring-ws-core or related Spring Web Services JAR files
    Affected if Spring Web Services is not present in your environment
  2. Confirm WS-Addressing is enabled
    Search application configuration for WS-Addressing setup: check XML config for ws:annotation-driven or WS-Addressing interceptors, or Java config for @EnableWs and any ActionInterceptor or AddressingInterceptor bean definitions
    Affected if WS-Addressing is disabled or not configured in your application
  3. Inspect WS-Addressing header handling
    Review endpoint or interceptor configuration that processes incoming SOAP requests to determine whether ReplyTo and FaultTo headers are accepted from requests. Look for any code that reads these headers and uses them to set connection destinations
    Affected if Your application accepts and acts upon non-anonymous ReplyTo or FaultTo headers from incoming requests without validation
  4. Check WebServiceMessageSender destination validation
    Examine any custom WebServiceMessageSender implementations or configuration to see if outbound connection destinations are validated or allowlisted before the HTTP request is made
    Affected if No destination validation or allowlisting is performed on ReplyTo/FaultTo URLs before initiating outbound connections

Your environment is affected if Spring Web Services is present with WS-Addressing enabled and configured to accept non-anonymous ReplyTo or FaultTo addresses from incoming requests without validating the destination URLs.

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.

dbcve · scoped
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Implement allowlist-based validation for ReplyTo/FaultTo addresses before use in outbound connections, or upgrade to a patched Spring WS version if available.

Recommended fix Moderate confidence

Upgrade to Spring Web Services 5.0.2+, 4.1.4+, 4.0.19+, or 3.1.9+ depending on your current major version branch

  1. 1. Identify which Spring Web Services version is currently in use by checking project dependencies (pom.xml, build.gradle, or MANIFEST.MF)
  2. 2. For Spring Web Services 5.0.x: upgrade to version 5.0.2 or later
  3. 3. For Spring Web Services 4.1.x: upgrade to version 4.1.4 or later
  4. 4. For Spring Web Services 4.0.x: upgrade to version 4.0.19 or later
  5. 5. For Spring Web Services 3.1.x: upgrade to version 3.1.9 or later
  6. 6. Update dependency version in build configuration (pom.xml or build.gradle)
  7. 7. Rebuild and test the application to verify the upgrade does not break existing functionality
  8. 8. Deploy the updated application
Caveat Review release notes for any breaking changes between your current version and the target upgrade version; older branches (3.x, 4.0.x) may have limited support

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing6.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
22.0 hours of engineering $3,860
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-40999 — 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-2026-40999 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