CVE-2025-6108VulnerabilityPublished 16 Jun 2025

CVE-2025-6108: hansonwang99 Spring-Boot-In-Action · Path Traversal

Affects hansonwang99 Spring-Boot-In-ActionSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.3 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

5.3Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 43% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P

Base metrics

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: Low
Vulnerable system availability: Low
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

Threat metrics

Exploit Maturity: POC

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker requires privileges that provide basic capabilities that are typically limited to settings and resources owned by a single low-privileged user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the Vulnerable System are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Exploit Maturity: POC: Based on threat intelligence sources each of the following must apply: · Proof-of-concept is publicly available · No knowledge of reported attempts to exploit this vulnerability · No knowledge of publicly available solutions used to simplify attempts to exploit the vulnerability

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 16 Jun 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 2026-10-26.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

AI-suggested

1. Implement strict input validation and sanitization on all file upload parameters, especially the 'filename' argument, to prevent directory traversal sequences such as '../'. 2. Employ allowlisting of acceptable file names and extensions, rejecting any input containing suspicious path characters or patterns. 3. Configure the application to store uploaded files in isolated directories with minimal permissions, preventing access to sensitive system files even if traversal occurs. 4. Use containerization or sandboxing techniques to limit the impact of potential exploitation. 5. Monitor logs for unusual file access patterns or errors related to file uploads to detect exploitation attempts early. 6. If possible, temporarily disable or restrict the vulnerable watermarkTest functionality until a patch or update is available. 7. Engage in active threat intelligence sharing within industry groups to stay informed about emerging exploits targeting this vulnerability. 8. Consider deploying Web Application Firewalls (WAFs) with custom rules to detect and block path traversal payloads targeting the affected endpoint. 9. Conduct thorough code reviews and security testing on custom or third-party components that handle file uploads to identify similar vulnerabilities proactively.

Description

A vulnerability was found in hansonwang99 Spring-Boot-In-Action up to 807fd37643aa774b94fd004cc3adbd29ca17e9aa. It has been declared as critical. Affected by this vulnerability is the function watermarkTest of the file /springbt_watermark/src/main/java/cn/codesheep/springbt_watermark/service/ImageUploadService.java of the component File Upload. The manipulation of the argument filename leads to path traversal. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. This product takes the approach of rolling releases to provide continious delivery. Therefore, version details for affected and updated releases are not available. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.

Impact

For European organizations using the hansonwang99 Spring-Boot-In-Action framework, this vulnerability poses a risk of unauthorized access to sensitive files on servers hosting vulnerable applications. This could lead to leakage of confidential data, exposure of configuration files, or disclosure of credentials stored on the filesystem. In critical sectors such as finance, healthcare, or government, such data exposure could result in regulatory non-compliance, reputational damage, and operational disruptions. Additionally, attackers could leverage the path traversal to upload or execute malicious files if combined with other vulnerabilities or misconfigurations, potentially leading to full system compromise. The remote and unauthenticated nature of the exploit increases the attack surface, especially for publicly accessible web services. Given the rolling release model and lack of vendor response, organizations may face challenges in timely patching, increasing exposure duration. The medium CVSS score suggests moderate impact, but the actual risk could be higher depending on deployment context and data sensitivity.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…