Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-41044 is a high-severity Improper Input Validation (CWE-20) vulnerability in Apache Activemq. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 41% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
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-2026-41044 is an improper input validation and code injection vulnerability (CWE-20, CWE-94) affecting Apache ActiveMQ, Apache ActiveMQ Broker, and Apache ActiveMQ All. It enables an authenticated attacker to manipulate the admin web console by crafting a malicious broker name that evades validation, embedding an xbean binding. This binding can subsequently be exploited via a VM transport to load a remote Spring XML application context. The vulnerability impacts versions of Apache ActiveMQ prior to 5.19.6 and from 6.0.0 prior to 6.2.5, as well as the corresponding Broker and All components, with a CVSS v3.1 base score of 8.8 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H).
An attacker with low-privilege authenticated access (PR:L) can exploit this remotely over the network with no user interaction required. By first setting a malicious broker name in the admin console that includes the xbean binding, the attacker then leverages the DestinationView MBean to dispatch a message. This triggers VM transport creation referencing the tainted broker name, causing the broker's JVM to load and instantiate the remote malicious Spring XML context. Due to Spring's ResourceXmlApplicationContext instantiating singleton beans prior to BrokerService validation, the attacker achieves arbitrary code execution through bean factory methods like Runtime.exec().
The Apache ActiveMQ security advisory recommends upgrading to version 5.19.6 or 6.2.5, which address the issue by fixing the validation bypass and related code injection risks. Details are available in the official announcement at https://activemq.apache.org/security-advisories.data/CVE-2026-41044-announcement.txt and the oss-security mailing list at http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2026/04/23/6.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-25412
Vulnerability Data
Improper Input Validation, Improper Control of Generation of Code ('Code Injection') vulnerability in Apache ActiveMQ, Apache ActiveMQ Broker, Apache ActiveMQ All. An authenticated attacker can use the admin web console page to construct a malicious broker name that bypasses name…
more
validation to include an xbean binding that can be later used by a VM transport to load a remote Spring XML application. The attacker can then use the DestinationView mbean to send a message to trigger a VM transport creation that will reference this malicious broker name which can lead to loading the malicious Spring XML context file. Because Spring's ResourceXmlApplicationContext instantiates all singleton beans before the BrokerService validates the configuration, arbitrary code execution occurs on the broker's JVM through bean factory methods such as Runtime.exec(). This issue affects Apache ActiveMQ: before 5.19.6, from 6.0.0 before 6.2.5; Apache ActiveMQ Broker: before 5.19.6, from 6.0.0 before 6.2.5; Apache ActiveMQ All: before 5.19.6, from 6.0.0 before 6.2.5. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 6.2.5 or 5.19.6, which fixes the issue.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 6 hardening rules · 3 OS baselines
V1.3.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover missing input validation through analysis or test cases.
SI-10 directly requires validity checks on information inputs, structurally preventing improper or missing validation.
Least privilege limits the damage an injected code fragment can perform once executed.
Requiring documented development standards and tools can embed input-validation practices into the engineering process.
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.
Secure SDLC practices directly require and enforce input validation during development.
PR.DS-10 protects runtime data confidentiality/integrity but has no bearing on neutralizing externally influenced input during code generation, so neither direction shows any preventive effect.
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.
Testing against a defined set of requirements and using code review plus vulnerability scanning forces validation of inputs and handling of unanticipated conditions, reducing the chance that malformed data will be accepted.
Secure-coding guidelines and mandatory security testing (including code scans) compel developers to validate and sanitize inputs at design and implementation time, lowering the incidence of malformed or malicious data reaching downstream components.
Mandating input controls that include integrity checks and input validation ensures that untrusted data is examined before use, blocking the root cause of many injection and malformed-data weaknesses.
Security-by-design principles explicitly call for data validation and sanitization at every layer, reducing the chance that malformed or malicious input will be processed without scrutiny.
Requiring language-specific secure coding standards, peer review, SAST and documented mitigation of common programming errors forces validation of all inputs before they are trusted.
Regular automated validation of system software and data content, combined with scanning of all inbound files, enforces input validation at the boundary before untrusted content is processed.
Hardening callouts derived
Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).
RHEL 8 (1 rule)
- V-230265 RHEL 8 must prevent the installation of software, patches, service packs, device drivers, or operating system components of local packages without verification they have been digitally signed using a certificate that is issued by a Certificate Authority (CA) that is recognized and approved by the organization. prevents CWE-20