Skip to content

GHSA-8c6j-ffmf-q6vm CVE-2016-3081

Apache Struts RCE Vulnerability

High Known exploited Maven
Severity
8.1 / 10
High · CVSS 3.0
Exploit chance (EPSS)
96.53%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 99.88% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
Yes
In CISA's catalog since Oct 8, 2026
Weakness
CWE-77 Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command ('Command Injection')
Fix
2.3.20.3
Upgrade org.apache.struts:struts2-core to this version or later
Exploited in the wild. Apache Struts Command Injection Vulnerability (Apache Struts). Required action: Apply mitigations in accordance with vendor instructions, ensuring compliance with CISA’s BOD 26-04 Prioritizing Security Updates Based on Risk (see URL in Notes) guidance and CISA’s “Forensics Triage Requirements” (see URL in Notes). Follow applicable BOD 26-04 guidance for cloud services or discontinue use of the product if mitigations are unavailable. Stakeholders are responsible for evaluating each asset's internet exposure and ensuring adherence to BOD 26-04 patching guidelines. Due for U.S. federal agencies by Oct 11, 2026.

Description

Apache Struts 2.3.19 to 2.3.20.2, 2.3.21 to 2.3.24.1, and 2.3.25 to 2.3.28, when Dynamic Method Invocation is enabled, allow remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via method: prefix, related to chained expressions.

Affected versions

Maven

PackageVulnerableFixed in
org.apache.struts:struts2-core
>= 2.3.19, < 2.3.20.3
2.3.20.3
org.apache.struts:struts2-core
>= 2.3.21, < 2.3.24.3
2.3.24.3
org.apache.struts:struts2-core
>= 2.3.25, < 2.3.28.1
2.3.28.1

How to fix

Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.

org.apache.struts:struts2-core Maven → 2.3.20.3

maven
<dependency><groupId>org.apache.struts</groupId><artifactId>struts2-core</artifactId><version>2.3.20.3</version></dependency>
gradle
implementation("org.apache.struts:struts2-core:2.3.20.3")

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.0 8.1

CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
High
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

Weakness

CWE-77: Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in a Command ('Command Injection')

The product constructs all or part of a command using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the intended command when it is sent to a downstream component.

How to prevent it
  • Architecture and Design: If at all possible, use library calls rather than external processes to recreate the desired functionality.
  • Implementation: If possible, ensure that all external commands called from the program are statically created.
  • Implementation: Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does. When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue." Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
  • Operation: Run time: Run time policy enforcement may be used in an allowlist fashion to prevent use of any non-sanctioned commands.
  • System Configuration: Assign permissions that prevent the user from accessing/opening privileged files.

References

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Added to CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog
  4. Remediation due for U.S. federal agencies
  5. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-47qp-8v9g-39hp
Code injection in Apache Struts
Critical Known exploited Also affects org.apache.struts:struts2-core
GHSA-4wrr-9h5r-m92w
Apache Struts Remote Java Code Execution
Critical Known exploited Also affects org.apache.struts:struts2-core
CVE-2020-17530
Remote code execution in Apache Struts
Critical Known exploited Also affects org.apache.struts:struts2-core
GHSA-j77q-2qqg-6989
Apache Struts vulnerable to remote arbitrary command execution due to improper input validation
Critical Known exploited Also affects org.apache.struts:struts2-core
CVE-2018-11776
Apache Struts vulnerable to remote command execution (RCE) due to improper input validation
High Known exploited Also affects org.apache.struts:struts2-core
GHSA-qcfc-hmrc-59x7
Apache Struts 2 is Missing XML Validation
High Also affects org.apache.struts:struts2-core
GHSA-rg58-xhh7-mqjw
Apache Struts has a Denial of Service vulnerability
High Also affects org.apache.struts:struts2-core
GHSA-xx7v-hqxh-cjr9
Apache Struts is Vulnerable to DoS via File Leak
High Also affects org.apache.struts:struts2-core
Is this in your code?

MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.

Check your repos with MergeHarbor