Spring FrameworkFramework / library · VMware
CVE-2026-41841
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 · uneditedSpring MVC and WebFlux applications are vulnerable to Information Disclosure attacks when resolving static resources. Affected versions: Spring Framework 7.0.0 through 7.0.7; 6.2.0 through 6.2.18; 6.1.0 through 6.1.27; 5.3.0 through 5.3.48.
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 confidenceSpring MVC and WebFlux applications are vulnerable to information disclosure when resolving static resources. The vulnerability allows attackers to potentially access sensitive files or information through improper static resource resolution in affected Spring Framework versions.
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 FrameworkFramework / library
>= 5.3.0, < 5.3.49>= 6.1.0, < 6.1.28>= 6.2.0, < 6.2.18.1>= 7.0.0, < 7.0.7.1CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify Spring Framework versionInspect your project build file (pom.xml, build.gradle) or check the spring-core JAR metadata in your runtime classpath. Run: mvn dependency:tree | grep spring-core or examine the deployed spring-core-*.jar filename.Affected if The installed version falls within any of these ranges: 5.3.0 to 5.3.48, 6.1.0 to 6.1.27, 6.2.0 to 6.2.18, or 7.0.0 to 7.0.7.
-
Confirm Spring MVC or WebFlux is in useCheck your project dependencies for spring-webmvc or spring-webflux. Inspect your application configuration classes for @EnableWebMvc or @EnableWebFlux annotations, or review web.xml for DispatcherServlet configuration.Affected if Either Spring MVC or Spring WebFlux is included as a dependency in your application.
-
Verify static resource handling is enabledReview your Spring configuration (XML config, Java config, or application.properties/yaml) for static resource resource handler mappings. Look for spring.mvc.static-path-pattern, spring.web.resources.static-locations, or equivalent XML <mvc:resources> elements.Affected if Static resource serving is configured and the application serves files from any location.
-
Inspect static resource locationsExamine the static resource location configuration. Check what directories are exposed: spring.web.resources.static-locations, WebMvcConfigurer addResourceHandlers paths, or ResourceHandlerRegistry mappings. Identify if sensitive directories (classpath, WEB-INF, file system roots) are included.Affected if Static resources are served from classpath, WEB-INF, or other sensitive file system locations.
-
Review custom resource resolver configurationInspect any custom ResourceResolver or ResourceTransformer beans configured in your application. Look for PathResourceResolver or custom implementations that might allow traversal patterns.Affected if Custom resource resolvers are configured that extend beyond simple static file serving.
You are affected if your application runs an affected Spring Framework version (5.3.x before 5.3.49, 6.1.x before 6.1.28, 6.2.x before 6.2.18.1, or 7.0.x before 7.0.7.1) AND uses Spring MVC or WebFlux with static resource handling 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 · scoped5.3.496.1.286.2.18.1
Upgrade Spring Framework to version 7.0.8+, 6.2.19+, 6.1.28+, or 5.3.49+ to obtain the security patch. Alternatively, review and restrict static resource handler configurations as a temporary workaround.
Upgrade to the first fixed version in your current major version line: 5.3.49, 6.1.28, 6.2.18.1, or 7.0.7.1 (or subsequent patch releases)
- Identify the current Spring Framework version in use by checking project dependencies (e.g., pom.xml, build.gradle)
- Determine which version branch is in use (5.3.x, 6.1.x, 6.2.x, or 7.0.x)
- For Spring Framework 5.3.x: upgrade to version 5.3.49 or later
- For Spring Framework 6.1.x: upgrade to version 6.1.28 or later
- For Spring Framework 6.2.x: upgrade to version 6.2.18.1 or later
- For Spring Framework 7.0.x: upgrade to version 7.0.7.1 or later
- Update the version in build configuration file (pom.xml or build.gradle)
- Rebuild and test the application to ensure compatibility
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Fix this in Spring Framework
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing8.0 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 $4,288.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-41841 — 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-2026-41841 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