RFD Attack via “Content-Disposition” Header Sourced from Request
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 26/100)
- The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 0.61% (FIRST EPSS).
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. A low-privileged account is enough. A user must open a link or visit a page. Special conditions such as timing or configuration are required.
- Fixed version: VMware Spring Framework 6.0.29, 6.1.21, 6.2.8.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to VMware Spring Framework 6.0.29, 6.1.21, 6.2.8 or later.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS
Description In Spring Framework, versions 6.0.x as of 6.0.5, versions 6.1.x and 6.2.x, an application is vulnerable to a reflected file download (RFD) attack when it sets a “Content-Disposition” header with a non-ASCII charset, where the filename attribute is derived from user-supplied input. Specifically, an application is vulnerable when all the following are true: * The header is prepared with org.springframework.http.ContentDisposition. * The filename is set via ContentDisposition.Builder#filename(String, Charset). * The value for the filename is derived from user-supplied input. * The application does not sanitize the user-supplied input. * The downloaded content of the response is injected with malicious commands by the attacker (see RFD paper reference for details). An application is not vulnerable if any of the following is true: * The application does not set a “Content-Disposition” response header. * The header is not prepared with org.springframework.http.ContentDisposition. * The filename is set via one of: * ContentDisposition.Builder#filename(String), or * ContentDisposition.Builder#filename(String, ASCII) * The filename is not derived from user-supplied input. * The filename is derived from user-supplied input but sanitized by the application. * The attacker cannot inject malicious content in the downloaded content of the response. Affected Spring Products and VersionsSpring Framework: * 6.2.0 - 6.2.7 * 6.1.0 - 6.1.20 * 6.0.5 - 6.0.28 * Older, unsupported versions are not affected MitigationUsers of affected versions should upgrade to the corresponding fixed version. Affected version(s)Fix versionAvailability6.2.x6.2.8OSS6.1.x6.1.21OSS6.0.x6.0.29 Commercial https://enterprise.spring.io/ No further mitigation steps are necessary. CWE-113 in `Content-Disposition` handling in VMware Spring Framework versions 6.0.5 to 6.2.7 allows remote attackers to launch Reflected File Download (RFD) attacks via unsanitized user input in `ContentDisposition.Builder#filename(String, Charset)` with non-ASCII charsets.
- Published
- Jun 12, 2025
- Updated
- Jun 17, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.6% · 48th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-113
Report tools
Action score
26
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 26 / 40 · 6.5 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.6%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- none
- Automatable
- no
- Technical impact
- partial
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- —
- CNA · vmware
- 6.5
- NVD has not scored this yet; the score shown is the CNA’s.
The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- No public exploit code on record
- A fix has been released
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
—
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (vmware). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
VMware Spring Framework
- 6.0.5 and later · up to and including 6.0.28affected · COMMERCIALfixed in 6.0.29
- 6.1.0 and later · up to and including 6.1.20affected · OSSfixed in 6.1.21
- 6.2.0 and later · up to and including 6.2.7affected · OSSfixed in 6.2.8
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| Maven | org.springframework:spring-web | from 6.0.5 · up to and including 6.0.23 | — |
| Maven | org.springframework:spring-web | from 6.1.0 · before 6.1.21 | 6.1.21 |
| Maven | org.springframework:spring-web | from 6.2.0 · before 6.2.8 | 6.2.8 |
Same product
vmware: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2022-22965A Spring MVC or Spring WebFlux application running on JDK 9+ may be vulnerable to remote code execution (RCE) via data binding.KEV99Now
- CVE-2018-1270Spring Framework, versions 5.0 prior to 5.0.5 and versions 4.3 prior to 4.3.15 and older unsupported versions, allow applications to expose 62This week
- CVE-2020-5398RFD Attack via "Content-Disposition" Header Sourced from Request Input by Spring MVC or Spring WebFlux Application57Plan
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2024-38808Aug 20, 2024 · CVE-2024-38808: Spring Expression DoS Vulnerability17Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2024-38820Oct 18, 2024 · CVE-2024-38820: Spring Framework DataBinder Case Sensitive Match Exception21Monitor
- Later →CVE-2025-41242Aug 18, 2025 · CVE-2025-41242: Path traversal vulnerability on non-compliant Servlet containers24Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
| Product / package | Fixed version | Source |
|---|---|---|
| VMware Spring Framework | 6.0.29 | Vendor (CNA) |
| VMware Spring Framework | 6.1.21 | Vendor (CNA) |
| VMware Spring Framework | 6.2.8 | Vendor (CNA) |
| Maven:org.springframework:spring-web | 6.1.21 | Package registry (OSV) |
| Maven:org.springframework:spring-web | 6.2.8 | Package registry (OSV) |
Exploit status
No known public exploit
No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
No dated events beyond publication.
FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
No commit or PR link among the references.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
No credits in the CNA record.
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
- CVE-2026-59314441 days apartSpring Framework response splitting in ContentDisposition14Monitor
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
- A low-privileged account is enough.
- A user must open a link or visit a page.
- Special conditions such as timing or configuration are required.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- high · data can be read
- Integrity
- low · data or configuration can be modified
- Availability
- none
Impact can extend beyond the vulnerable component (scope changes).
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- High
- Privileges required
- Low
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Changed
- Confidentiality impact
- High
- Integrity impact
- Low
- Availability impact
- None
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-113 · Improper Neutralization of CRLF Sequences in HTTP Headers ('HTTP Request/Response Splitting')CVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:N
nvd-secondary
Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
ATT&CK techniques
Change log
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Show all references (2 more)Show less
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.