Spring For Apache PulsarWeb server / proxy · VMware
CVE-2026-41732
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 · uneditedJsonPulsarHeaderMapper matched type headers against trusted packages using a prefix check, meaning that trusting any package implicitly trusted all of its subpackages. Additionally, an empty trusted-packages configuration fell back to trusting all packages rather than applying a safe default allow-list. Affected versions: Spring for Apache Pulsar 2.0.0 through 2.0.5; 1.2.0 through 1.2.17; 1.1.0 through 1.1.17.
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 JsonPulsarHeaderMapper in Spring for Apache Pulsar performs prefix-based matching when validating trusted packages. Trusting a parent package (e.g., 'com.example') implicitly trusts all subpackages, allowing potential malicious types to be deserialized. Additionally, an empty trusted-packages configuration defaults to trusting ALL packages instead of applying a secure allow-list, enabling remote code execution if untrusted message types are processed.
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
Spring For Apache PulsarWeb server / proxy
>= 1.1.0, < 1.1.18>= 1.2.0, < 1.2.17.1>= 2.0.0, < 2.0.6CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/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 installed Spring for Apache Pulsar versionCheck your project's dependency management (Maven pom.xml, Gradle build.gradle, or the spring-pulsar-dependencies JAR) to find the exact version of org.springframework.pulsar:spring-pulsar-dependencies or spring-pulsar-spring-boot-starterAffected if The installed version falls within 1.1.0-1.1.17, 1.2.0-1.2.17, or 2.0.0-2.0.5
-
Locate JsonPulsarHeaderMapper configurationSearch for JsonPulsarHeaderMapper bean definitions or pulsar listener configurations in your Java/YAML configuration files, typically in application.properties/application.yml under spring.pulsar.listener or custom bean definitionsAffected if JsonPulsarHeaderMapper is configured and in use for Pulsar message handling
-
Check trusted-packages configuration settingLook for trusted-packages or trustedPackagePatterns properties in your Pulsar configuration (spring.pulsar.listener.json.trusted-packages or similar YAML paths)Affected if The trusted-packages setting is either absent, commented out, or explicitly set to an empty list
-
Verify if prefix-based package matching is in useIf trusted-packages is configured, examine whether it contains parent packages (e.g., 'com.example') that would implicitly trust subpackages like 'com.example.evil'Affected if Any trusted package entry is a parent package that covers subpackages not explicitly intended to be trusted
You are affected if you use a vulnerable Spring for Apache Pulsar version (1.1.x, 1.2.x, or 2.0.0-2.0.5) with JsonPulsarHeaderMapper and either have an empty/missing trusted-packages configuration or rely on prefix matching of parent packages.
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 · scoped1.1.181.2.17.12.0.6
Configure explicit, granular trusted-packages lists avoiding prefix matching; ensure the configuration is never empty. Upgrade to Spring for Apache Pulsar 2.0.6+, 1.2.18+, or 1.1.18+ which contain the patched behavior.
Spring for Apache Pulsar 1.1.18, 1.2.17.1, or 2.0.6 (or later depending on your branch)
- Identify the current version of Spring for Apache Pulsar in your project by checking pom.xml or build.gradle
- Determine the appropriate upgrade path based on your current version branch (1.1.x, 1.2.x, or 2.0.x)
- Upgrade Spring for Apache Pulsar dependency to version 1.1.18, 1.2.17.1, or 2.0.6 (or later) in your build configuration
- After upgrading, explicitly configure trusted-packages in your JsonPulsarHeaderMapper to ensure only intended packages are trusted (do not leave it empty)
- Run tests to verify the upgrade does not break existing functionality
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Fix this in Spring For Apache Pulsar
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-41732 — 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-2026-41732 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