Skip to content

c3p0 vulnerable to Remote Code Execution via unsafe deserialization of userOverridesAsString property

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published Feb 23, 2026 in swaldman/c3p0 • Updated Feb 27, 2026

Package

maven com.mchange:c3p0 (Maven)

Affected versions

< 0.12.0

Patched versions

0.12.0

Description

Impact

c3p0 is vulnerable to attack via maliciously crafted Java-serialized objects and javax.naming.Reference instances. Several c3p0 ConnectionPoolDataSource implementations have a property called userOverridesAsString which conceptually represents a Map<String,Map<String,String>>. Prior to v0.12.0, that property was maintained as a hex-encoded serialized object. Any attacker able to reset this property, on an existing ConnectionPoolDataSource or via maliciously crafted serialized objects or javax.naming.Reference instances could be tailored execute unexpected code on the application's CLASSPATH.

The danger of this vulnerability was strongly magnified by vulnerabilities in c3p0's main dependency, mchange-commons-java. This library includes code that mirrors early implementations of JNDI functionality, including ungated support for remote factoryClassLocation values. Attackers could set c3p0's userOverridesAsString hex-encoded serialized objects that include objects "indirectly serialized" via JNDI references. Deserialization of those objects and dereferencing of the embedded javax.naming.Reference objects could provoke download and execution of malicious code from a remote factoryClassLocation.

Although hazard presented by c3p0's vulnerabilites are exarcerbated by vulnerabilities in mchange-commons-java, use of Java-serialized-object hex as the format for a writable Java-Bean property, of objects that may be exposed across JNDI interfaces, represents a serious independent fragility.

Patches

The userOverridesAsString property of c3p0 ConnectionPoolDataSource classes has been reimplemented to use a safe CSV-based format, rather than rely upon potentially dangerous Java object deserialization.

c3p0-0.12.0+ and above depend upon mchange-commons-java 0.4.0+, which gates support for remote factoryClassLocation values by configuration parameters that default to restrictive values. Those parameters are documented here.

c3p0 additionally enforces the new mchange-commons-java com.mchange.v2.naming.nameGuardClassName to prevent injection of unexpected, potentially remote JNDI names.

Workarounds

Users should upgrade to c3p0-0.12.0 or above. There is no supported workaround for earlier versions of c3p0.

References

c3p0, you little rascal — Hans-Martin Münch
c3p0 documentation, security note
c3p0 documentation, configuring security

References

@swaldman swaldman published to swaldman/c3p0 Feb 23, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Feb 25, 2026
Reviewed Feb 25, 2026
Published by the National Vulnerability Database Feb 26, 2026
Last updated Feb 27, 2026

Severity

High

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector Adjacent
Attack Complexity Low
Attack Requirements Present
Privileges Required Low
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality High
Integrity High
Availability High
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality High
Integrity High
Availability High

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector: This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. This metric value (and consequently the resulting severity) will be larger the more remote (logically, and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerable system. The assumption is that the number of potential attackers for a vulnerability that could be exploited from across a network is larger than the number of potential attackers that could exploit a vulnerability requiring physical access to a device, and therefore warrants a greater severity.
Attack Complexity: This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. These are conditions whose primary purpose is to increase security and/or increase exploit engineering complexity. A vulnerability exploitable without a target-specific variable has a lower complexity than a vulnerability that would require non-trivial customization. This metric is meant to capture security mechanisms utilized by the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These differ from security-enhancing techniques/technologies (ref Attack Complexity) as the primary purpose of these conditions is not to explicitly mitigate attacks, but rather, emerge naturally as a consequence of the deployment and execution of the vulnerable system.
Privileges Required: This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. The method by which the attacker obtains privileged credentials prior to the attack (e.g., free trial accounts), is outside the scope of this metric. Generally, self-service provisioned accounts do not constitute a privilege requirement if the attacker can grant themselves privileges as part of the attack.
User interaction: This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable system. This metric determines whether the vulnerability can be exploited solely at the will of the attacker, or whether a separate user (or user-initiated process) must participate in some manner.
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the VULNERABLE SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
CVSS:4.0/AV:A/AC:L/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(26th percentile)

Weaknesses

Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection')

The product constructs all or part of a code segment using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the syntax or behavior of the intended code segment. Learn more on MITRE.

Deserialization of Untrusted Data

The product deserializes untrusted data without sufficiently ensuring that the resulting data will be valid. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-27830

GHSA ID

GHSA-5476-xc4j-rqcv

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.