CxfApplication · Apache
CVE-2026-57819
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 · uneditedApache CXF allows to set a limit on the number of form parameters in a JAX-RS message via the "maxFormParameterCount" configuration option. However, no default limit is set which may lead to denial of service attacks when processing requests with very large numbers of form parameters. Users are recommended to upgrade to versions 4.2.3 or 4.1.8 or 3.6.12, which fix this issue by using a default limit of 500 parameters.
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 analysisA single request can consume unbounded CPU, memory, or connections, so a modest amount of malicious traffic exhausts the service. The result is denial of service for everyone else. Remediation is enforcing limits, quotas, and timeouts on what any one request can use.
General guidance for the uncontrolled resource consumption class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
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
CxfApplication
< 3.6.12>= 4.0.0, < 4.1.8>= 4.2.0, < 4.2.3CVSS 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
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 · scoped3.6.124.1.84.2.3
4.2.3 (or 4.1.8 for 4.0.x-4.1.x branch, or 3.6.12 for 3.x branch)
- 1. Identify the current Apache CXF version in use by checking project dependencies (e.g., pom.xml for Maven, build.gradle for Gradle, or container/deployment configuration)
- 2. Upgrade Apache CXF to version 4.2.3 (for CXF 4.x users), 4.1.8 (for CXF 4.0.x-4.1.x users), or 3.6.12 (for CXF 3.x users)
- 3. Update the dependency in your build configuration (e.g., update version in pom.xml from <dependency>org.apache.cxf</dependency>)
- 4. Rebuild and redeploy the application
- 5. Test the application to ensure form parameter processing works correctly with the new default limit of 500 parameters
- 6. If your application legitimately requires more than 500 form parameters, explicitly configure maxFormParameterCount to a higher value in your CXF JAX-RS configuration
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-57819 — 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-2026-57819 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