Security Bulletin
Summary
Multiple vulnerabilities were addressed in IBM watsonx Orchestrate Cartridge for IBM Cloud Pak for Data version 5.3
Vulnerability Details
CVEID: CVE-2025-41242
DESCRIPTION: Spring Framework MVC applications can be vulnerable to a “Path Traversal Vulnerability” when deployed on a non-compliant Servlet container.
An application can be vulnerable when all the following are true:
* the application is deployed as a WAR or with an embedded Servlet container
* the Servlet container does not reject suspicious sequences https://jakarta.ee/specifications/servlet/6.1/jakarta-servlet-spec-6.1…
* the application serves static resources https://docs.spring.io/spring-framework/reference/web/webmvc/mvc-config… with Spring resource handling
We have verified that applications deployed on Apache Tomcat or Eclipse Jetty are not vulnerable, as long as default security features are not disabled in the configuration. Because we cannot check exploits against all Servlet containers and configuration variants, we strongly recommend upgrading your application.
CWE: CWE-22: Improper Limitation of a Pathname to a Restricted Directory ('Path Traversal')
CVSS Source: security@vmware.com
CVSS Base score: 5.9
CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N)
CVEID: CVE-2025-57285
DESCRIPTION: codeceptjs 3.7.3 contains a command injection vulnerability in the emptyFolder function (lib/utils.js). The execSync command directly concatenates the user-controlled directoryPath parameter without sanitization or escaping, allowing attackers to execute arbitrary commands.
CWE: CWE-77: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command ('Command Injection')
CVSS Source: CISA ADP
CVSS Base score: 9.8
CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H)
CVEID: CVE-2025-59139
DESCRIPTION: Hono is a Web application framework that provides support for any JavaScript runtime. In versions prior to 4.9.7, a flaw in the `bodyLimit` middleware could allow bypassing the configured request body size limit when conflicting HTTP headers were present. The middleware previously prioritized the `Content-Length` header even when a `Transfer-Encoding: chunked` header was also included. According to the HTTP specification, `Content-Length` must be ignored in such cases. This discrepancy could allow oversized request bodies to bypass the configured limit. Most standards-compliant runtimes and reverse proxies may reject such malformed requests with `400 Bad Request`, so the practical impact depends on the runtime and deployment environment. If body size limits are used as a safeguard against large or malicious requests, this flaw could allow attackers to send oversized request bodies. The primary risk is denial of service (DoS) due to excessive memory or CPU consumption when handling very large requests. The implementation has been updated to align with the HTTP specification, ensuring that `Transfer-Encoding` takes precedence over `Content-Length`. The issue is fixed in Hono v4.9.7, and all users should upgrade immediately.
CWE: CWE-400: Uncontrolled Resource Consumption
CVSS Source: security-advisories@github.com
CVSS Base score: 5.3
CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L)
CVEID: CVE-2025-41234
DESCRIPTION: 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.
CWE: CWE-113: Improper Neutralization of CRLF Sequences in HTTP Headers ('HTTP Request/Response Splitting')
CVSS Source: security@vmware.com
CVSS Base score: 6.5
CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:L/A:N)
CVEID: CVE-2025-41249
DESCRIPTION: The Spring Framework annotation detection mechanism may not correctly resolve annotations on methods within type hierarchies with a parameterized super type with unbounded generics. This can be an issue if such annotations are used for authorization decisions.
Your application may be affected by this if you are using Spring Security's @EnableMethodSecurity feature.
You are not affected by this if you are not using @EnableMethodSecurity or if you do not use security annotations on methods in generic superclasses or generic interfaces.
This CVE is published in conjunction with CVE-2025-41248 https://spring.io/security/cve-2025-41248 .
CWE: CWE-285: Improper Authorization
CVSS Source: security@vmware.com
CVSS Base score: 7.5
CVSS Vector: (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N)
Affected Products and Versions
| Affected Product(s) | Version(s) |
| IBM watsonx Orchestrate Cartridge for IBM Cloud Pak for Data | 4.8.4-4.8.5 |
| IBM watsonx Orchestrate Cartridge for IBM Cloud Pak for Data | 5.0.0-5.2.2 |
Remediation/Fixes
IBM strongly recommends addressing the vulnerability now by upgrading to IBM watsonx Orchestrate Cartridge 5.3
Workarounds and Mitigations
None
Get Notified about Future Security Bulletins
References
Acknowledgement
Change History
17 Dec 2025: Initial Publication
*The CVSS Environment Score is customer environment specific and will ultimately impact the Overall CVSS Score. Customers can evaluate the impact of this vulnerability in their environments by accessing the links in the Reference section of this Security Bulletin.
Disclaimer
According to the Forum of Incident Response and Security Teams (FIRST), the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) is an "industry open standard designed to convey vulnerability severity and help to determine urgency and priority of response." IBM PROVIDES THE CVSS SCORES ""AS IS"" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, INCLUDING THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. CUSTOMERS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF ANY ACTUAL OR POTENTIAL SECURITY VULNERABILITY. In addition to other efforts to address potential vulnerabilities, IBM periodically updates the record of components contained in our product offerings. As part of that effort, if IBM identifies previously unidentified packages in a product/service inventory, we address relevant vulnerabilities regardless of CVE date. Inclusion of an older CVEID does not demonstrate that the referenced product has been used by IBM since that date, nor that IBM was aware of a vulnerability as of that date. We are making clients aware of relevant vulnerabilities as we become aware of them. "Affected Products and Versions" referenced in IBM Security Bulletins are intended to be only products and versions that are supported by IBM and have not passed their end-of-support or warranty date. Thus, failure to reference unsupported or extended-support products and versions in this Security Bulletin does not constitute a determination by IBM that they are unaffected by the vulnerability. Reference to one or more unsupported versions in this Security Bulletin shall not create an obligation for IBM to provide fixes for any unsupported or extended-support products or versions.
Document Location
Worldwide
Was this topic helpful?
Document Information
Modified date:
17 December 2025
Initial Publish date:
17 December 2025
UID
ibm17255071