Skip to content

[Snyk] Security upgrade org.eclipse.jetty:jetty-server from 9.4.53.v20231009 to 12.1.5#87

Open
snyk-io[bot] wants to merge 1 commit intomasterfrom
snyk-fix-1a1697e380e538becadf5d540333f871
Open

[Snyk] Security upgrade org.eclipse.jetty:jetty-server from 9.4.53.v20231009 to 12.1.5#87
snyk-io[bot] wants to merge 1 commit intomasterfrom
snyk-fix-1a1697e380e538becadf5d540333f871

Conversation

@snyk-io
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@snyk-io snyk-io Bot commented Mar 5, 2026

snyk-top-banner

Snyk has created this PR to fix 1 vulnerabilities in the maven dependencies of this project.

Snyk changed the following file(s):

  • pom.xml

Vulnerabilities that will be fixed with an upgrade:

Issue Score Upgrade
medium severity Interpretation Conflict
SNYK-JAVA-ORGECLIPSEJETTY-15426540
  62   org.eclipse.jetty:jetty-server:
9.4.53.v20231009 -> 12.1.5
No Path Found Proof of Concept

Breaking Change Risk

Merge Risk: High

Notice: This assessment is enhanced by AI.


Important

  • Check the changes in this PR to ensure they won't cause issues with your project.
  • Max score is 1000. Note that the real score may have changed since the PR was raised.
  • This PR was automatically created by Snyk using the credentials of a real user.

Note: You are seeing this because you or someone else with access to this repository has authorized Snyk to open fix PRs.

For more information:
🧐 View latest project report
📜 Customise PR templates
🛠 Adjust project settings
📚 Read about Snyk's upgrade logic


Learn how to fix vulnerabilities with free interactive lessons:

🦉 Learn about vulnerability in an interactive lesson of Snyk Learn.

@snyk-io
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

snyk-io Bot commented Mar 5, 2026

Merge Risk: High

This is a major upgrade across three significant versions (9.4 → 10 → 11 → 12) and introduces substantial breaking changes at each step. A simple version bump will not work and a multi-stage migration is required.

Key Breaking Changes:

  • Jetty 9.4 → 10.0:

    • Java Requirement: The minimum required Java version is now Java 11.
    • Logging: The proprietary Jetty logging facade has been completely replaced with SLF4J.
    • API Refactoring: WebSocket and Session management APIs have been heavily refactored, requiring code updates for embedded users.
  • Jetty 10.0 → 11.0:

    • Jakarta Namespace Migration: This is the most critical change. Following the Jakarta EE 9 specification, all javax.servlet packages have been renamed to jakarta.servlet. This requires a codebase-wide update of all imports and dependencies. Jetty 10 was the last version to use the javax.* namespace.
  • Jetty 11.0 → 12.0:

    • Core API Redesign: Jetty 12 is architecturally different. It decouples itself from the Servlet API. Core components like Handler, Request, and Response have been redesigned.
    • Servlet Support: To deploy traditional web applications, you must now explicitly enable a Servlet environment (e.g., ee8, ee9, ee10). The deploy module, for instance, must be changed to ee10-deploy.
    • Handler API: The Handler.handle() method signature has changed, and the Request object is now immutable.

Recommendation: This upgrade is a major undertaking that requires significant planning and code modification. It is not a direct upgrade. Developers should consult the official migration guides for each major version and consider a staged migration path. Upgrading from 9.4 to 12 is described by the project maintainers as having "a lot of changes across 3 major versions, in APIs and Maven artifact names".

Sources:

Notice 🤖: This content was augmented using artificial intelligence. AI-generated content may contain errors and should be reviewed for accuracy before use.

@snyk-io
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

snyk-io Bot commented Mar 5, 2026

Snyk checks have failed. 1 issues have been found so far.

Status Scanner Critical High Medium Low Total (1)
Open Source Security 0 1 0 0 1 issues
Licenses 0 0 0 0 0 issues

💻 Catch issues earlier using the plugins for VS Code, JetBrains IDEs, Visual Studio, and Eclipse.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

0 participants