Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2023-37895 is a critical-severity Deserialization of Untrusted Data (CWE-502) vulnerability in Apache Jackrabbit. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked in the top 13% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2023-37895 is a Java object deserialization vulnerability in Apache Jackrabbit webapp and standalone distributions on all platforms. It stems from the use of the commons-beanutils library in versions up to and including 2.20.10 on the stable branch and 2.21.17 on the unstable branch, which permits remote code execution over RMI and is tracked under CWE-502 with a CVSS score of 9.8.
Unauthenticated remote attackers can exploit the flaw by sending crafted serialized Java objects via the exposed RMI interface, achieving arbitrary code execution on the server with full confidentiality, integrity, and availability impact. Both the native RMI listener on TCP port 1099 and the RMI-over-HTTP binding at the /rmi path are enabled by default, broadening the attack surface.
Advisories from the Apache Jackrabbit project urge immediate upgrade to 2.20.11 or 2.21.18. They further recommend disabling RMI entirely by removing the RemoteBindingServlet declaration and mapping from web.xml and setting rmi.enabled=false in bootstrap.properties, noting that earlier branches are end-of-life and that the mere presence of exploitable classes on the classpath can be leveraged through RMI.
The associated EPSS score has remained near 0.10 with only minimal fluctuation between current and peak values, indicating no pronounced post-disclosure surge in exploitation interest.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-2127
Vulnerability Data
Java object deserialization issue in Jackrabbit webapp/standalone on all platforms allows attacker to remotely execute code via RMIVersions up to (including) 2.20.10 (stable branch) and 2.21.17 (unstable branch) use the component "commons-beanutils", which contains a class that can be used…
more
for remote code execution over RMI. Users are advised to immediately update to versions 2.20.11 or 2.21.18. Note that earlier stable branches (1.0.x .. 2.18.x) have been EOLd already and do not receive updates anymore. In general, RMI support can expose vulnerabilities by the mere presence of an exploitable class on the classpath. Even if Jackrabbit itself does not contain any code known to be exploitable anymore, adding other components to your server can expose the same type of problem. We therefore recommend to disable RMI access altogether (see further below), and will discuss deprecating RMI support in future Jackrabbit releases. How to check whether RMI support is enabledRMI support can be over an RMI-specific TCP port, and over an HTTP binding. Both are by default enabled in Jackrabbit webapp/standalone. The native RMI protocol by default uses port 1099. To check whether it is enabled, tools like "netstat" can be used to check. RMI-over-HTTP in Jackrabbit by default uses the path "/rmi". So when running standalone on port 8080, check whether an HTTP GET request on localhost:8080/rmi returns 404 (not enabled) or 200 (enabled). Note that the HTTP path may be different when the webapp is deployed in a container as non-root context, in which case the prefix is under the user's control. Turning off RMIFind web.xml (either in JAR/WAR file or in unpacked web application folder), and remove the declaration and the mapping definition for the RemoteBindingServlet: <servlet> <servlet-name>RMI</servlet-name> <servlet-class>org.apache.jackrabbit.servlet.remote.RemoteBindingServlet</servlet-class> </servlet> <servlet-mapping> <servlet-name>RMI</servlet-name> <url-pattern>/rmi</url-pattern> </servlet-mapping> Find the bootstrap.properties file (in $REPOSITORY_HOME), and set rmi.enabled=false and also remove rmi.host rmi.port rmi.url-pattern If there is no file named bootstrap.properties in $REPOSITORY_HOME, it is located somewhere in the classpath. In this case, place a copy in $REPOSITORY_HOME and modify it as explained.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Likely Mitigating Controls AI
Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.
Penetration testing supplies malicious serialized objects, detecting unsafe deserialization and supporting corrective actions.
Evaluation of untrusted data handling (deserialization testing) reveals unsafe processing, which the required remediation process addresses.
Untrusted serialized data can be deserialized and observed inside the chamber, blocking gadget-chain exploitation outside the sandbox.
Validates or rejects untrusted serialized data before deserialization occurs.
Identifies and blocks malicious code introduced through deserialization of untrusted data at system boundaries.
Integrity verification of serialized information can detect tampering before deserialization occurs.
Provenance of associated data allows detection of untrusted sources before deserialization or processing occurs.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
PR.PS-02 addresses only post-deployment updates/patching and cannot prevent introduction of unsafe deserialization code, yet it can remediate some instances when the flaw exists in outdated libraries or components.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Security testing includes validation of deserialization routines and the use of untrusted data, reducing the likelihood that unsafe object reconstruction will be deployed.
Requiring vetted libraries, regular updates and SAST before release reduces the likelihood that deserialization logic will accept and act on attacker-controlled serialized objects.
Regular scanning of third-party libraries and timely patching reduce the likelihood that unsafe deserialization vulnerabilities remain active.
Mandatory malware scanning of data received over networks or storage media intercepts malicious serialized payloads before they are deserialized by the target application.