Spring FrameworkFramework / library · VMware
CVE-2026-41848
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 · uneditedApplications may be vulnerable to a Regular Expression Denial of Service (ReDoS) attack if an attacker is able to provide a pattern which is then directly or indirectly supplied to one of the following methods in AntPathMatcher: match(String pattern, String path), matchStart(String pattern, String path), extractUriTemplateVariables(String pattern, String path). 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 Framework's AntPathMatcher contains a ReDoS vulnerability where malicious patterns supplied to match(), matchStart(), or extractUriTemplateVariables() methods can trigger catastrophic regex backtracking, causing denial of service. An attacker able to control the pattern input can exploit this to hang the application.
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
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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 Spring Framework versionInspect your project dependencies (pom.xml, build.gradle, gradle.lock, or Maven dependency tree) to find the spring-core or spring-context version. Also check the lib directory for spring-core-*.jar files.Affected if The version falls in any of these ranges: 5.3.0-5.3.48, 6.1.0-6.1.27, 6.2.0-6.2.18, or 7.0.0-7.0.7.
-
Locate AntPathMatcher usageSearch your codebase for imports of org.springframework.util.AntPathMatcher and instantiations of this class. Check for Bean definitions of AntPathMatcher in configuration files.Affected if AntPathMatcher is used in your application code.
-
Identify method calls that accept patternsSearch for calls to match(), matchStart(), or extractUriTemplateVariables() methods on AntPathMatcher instances. Review method signatures to see if pattern arguments come from user request parameters, headers, or external input sources.Affected if User-controlled or external input is passed to any of these three methods.
-
Check pattern input sourcesTrace the data flow for pattern arguments in AntPathMatcher method calls. Look for pattern sources including: HttpServletRequest parameters, path variables, query strings, external API inputs, configuration files loaded from user-controlled paths, or any input derived from untrusted sources.Affected if Patterns processed by AntPathMatcher originate from untrusted or user-controlled sources.
Your application is affected if it runs a vulnerable Spring Framework version AND uses AntPathMatcher with patterns derived from user or external input passed to match(), matchStart(), or extractUriTemplateVariables() methods.
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 to Spring Framework 5.3.49+, 6.1.28+, 6.2.19+, or 7.0.8+ which contain the fix. Alternatively, implement input validation to reject or sanitize untrusted patterns before passing them to AntPathMatcher methods.
Spring Framework 5.3.49, 6.1.28, 6.2.18.1, or 7.0.7.1 depending on your version line
- 1. Identify the current Spring Framework version in your project by checking your build configuration (pom.xml for Maven or build.gradle for Gradle).
- 2. Determine which major version line you are using (5.3.x, 6.1.x, 6.2.x, or 7.0.x).
- 3. For Maven projects, update the spring-framework-bom or individual spring-core dependency version to the fixed release for your version line.
- 4. For Gradle projects, update the spring-core dependency version accordingly.
- 5. Rebuild and test your application to ensure the upgrade does not introduce regressions.
- 6. If you cannot upgrade immediately, audit your codebase to ensure untrusted input is not passed to AntPathMatcher methods (match, matchStart, extractUriTemplateVariables).
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
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-41848 — 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-2026-41848 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