CVE-2026-47838
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 · uneditedSubjectDnX509PrincipalExtractor does not correctly handle certain malformed X.509 certificate CN values, which can lead to reading the wrong value for the username. In a carefully crafted certificate, this can lead to an attacker impersonating another user. Affected versions: Spring Security 5.7.0 through 5.7.24; 5.8.0 through 5.8.26; 6.3.0 through 6.3.17; 6.4.0 through 6.4.17; 6.5.0 through 6.5.10.
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 SubjectDnX509PrincipalExtractor in Spring Security incorrectly parses malformed X.509 certificate CN (Common Name) values, potentially extracting the wrong username. An attacker with a specially crafted certificate could impersonate another user by manipulating the CN field.
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< 5.7.25>= 5.8.0, < 5.8.27>= 6.3.0, < 6.3.18>= 6.4.0, < 6.4.18>= 6.5.0, < 6.5.11CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 Security versionLocate the Spring Security library in your project dependencies (pom.xml, build.gradle, or in the packaged application WEB-INF/lib directory) and note the exact version numberAffected if The version falls into any of these ranges: < 5.7.25, >= 5.8.0 and < 5.8.27, >= 6.3.0 and < 6.3.18, >= 6.4.0 and < 6.4.18, or >= 6.5.0 and < 6.5.11
-
Confirm X.509 authentication is enabledSearch your Spring Security configuration (Java config, XML config, or properties) for calls to x509() method in HttpSecurity or SecurityFilterChain configuration, or look for x509-authentication-enabled propertyAffected if X.509 certificate-based authentication is explicitly configured and active in the application
-
Verify SubjectDnX509PrincipalExtractor is in useCheck if your X.509 configuration uses the default principal extractor or explicitly configures SubjectDnX509PrincipalExtractor - this is the default behavior when x509() is enabled without custom principalExtractor specificationAffected if The application extracts usernames from the Subject DN (CN field) of X.509 certificates, which is the default behavior for Spring Security X.509 authentication
You are affected if your application uses Spring Security X.509 authentication with the default SubjectDnX509PrincipalExtractor and your Spring Security version is within any of the affected ranges listed.
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 · scoped5.7.255.8.276.3.18
Upgrade Spring Security to version 5.7.25+, 5.8.27+, 6.3.18+, 6.4.18+, or 6.5.11+ as appropriate. Verify X.509 authentication configurations and test with both valid and malformed certificates after upgrading.
Upgrade to Spring Security 5.7.25, 5.8.27, 6.3.18, 6.4.18, or 6.5.11+ (depending on your branch)
- 1. Identify your current Spring Security version by checking your build configuration (Maven pom.xml or Gradle build.gradle)
- 2. Determine which Spring Security branch you are using (5.7.x, 5.8.x, 6.3.x, 6.4.x, or 6.5.x)
- 3. Upgrade to the minimum fixed version for your branch: For 5.7.x upgrade to 5.7.25; For 5.8.x upgrade to 5.8.27; For 6.3.x upgrade to 6.3.18; For 6.4.x upgrade to 6.4.18; For 6.5.x upgrade to 6.5.11 or later
- 4. Update the Spring Security version in your build configuration file
- 5. Rebuild and test your application to verify the authentication behavior remains correct
- 6. If using custom X.509 principal extraction, verify your configuration still works as expected with the fixed version
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,160.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-47838 — 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-2026-47838 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