CVE-2026-47323
Apache Camel 3.18.0 – 4.14.6
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-47323 is a critical-severity Improper Handling of Case Sensitivity (CWE-178) vulnerability in Apache Camel. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Masquerading (T1036); ranked in the top 26% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SI-10 (Information Input Validation) and AC-24 (Access Control Decisions) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-30895
Vulnerability Data
Camel-CXF and Camel-Knative Message Header Injection via Missing Inbound Filtering The CXF and Knative HeaderFilterStrategy implementations (CxfRsHeaderFilterStrategy in camel-cxf-rest, CxfHeaderFilterStrategy in camel-cxf-transport, and KnativeHttpHeaderFilterStrategy in camel-knative-http) only filter outbound Camel-internal headers via setOutFilterStartsWith, while not configuring inbound filtering via setInFilterStartsWith.…
more
As a result, an unauthenticated attacker can inject Camel-internal headers (e.g. CamelExecCommandExecutable, CamelFileName) via HTTP requests to CXF-RS or CXF-SOAP endpoints. When a route forwards messages from these endpoints to header-driven components such as camel-exec or camel-file, the injected headers override configured values, enabling remote code execution or arbitrary file writes. This is the same pattern that was previously addressed in camel-undertow (CVE-2025-30177), the broader incoming-header filter (CVE-2025-27636 and CVE-2025-29891), and non-HTTP strategies (CVE-2026-40453). This issue affects Apache Camel: from 3.18.0 before 4.14.6, from 4.15.0 before 4.18.2. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 4.19.0, which fixes the issue. If users are on the 4.18.x LTS releases stream, then they are suggested to upgrade to 4.18.2. If users are on the 4.14.x LTS releases stream, then they are suggested to upgrade to 4.14.6.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Input validation directly requires complete filtering of special elements on received data before further processing or forwarding.
Applying access control decisions to each request depends on accurate property determination that accounts for case differences.
Correct enforcement of authorizations for resource access structurally requires consistent case-sensitive handling of identifiers to avoid incorrect decisions.
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 can catch and prevent case-sensitivity flaws during code review or testing, but fixing one CWE achieves negligible coverage of the broad control.
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.
Secure SDLC practices should include case-sensitivity requirements in design and coding standards.
Application security requirements must specify case handling for identifiers and paths.
Architecture principles should enforce canonical, case-aware resource naming.
Secure coding guidelines must mandate explicit case handling to prevent inconsistent lookups.
Security testing in development and acceptance can detect incomplete filtering but does not itself implement the filtering.
Access-control rules that ignore case can allow unintended resource access.