Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-49086

Apache Camel 4.12.0 – 4.14.8

Published
06 July 2026
Modified
08 July 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 6.5
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
EPSS Score 0.0043 35th percentile
Risk Priority 35 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2026-49086 is a medium-severity Improper Input Validation (CWE-20) vulnerability in Apache Camel. Its CVSS base score is 6.5 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 35th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-4 (Information Flow Enforcement) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Improper Input Validation, Unintended Proxy or Intermediary ('Confused Deputy') vulnerability in Apache Camel DAPR component. The camel-dapr Dapr Pub/Sub consumer (DaprPubSubConsumer) copied two fields from each inbound CloudEvent - its Pub/Sub component name and its topic - into the CamelDaprPubSubName…

more

and CamelDaprTopic Exchange headers. These two headers are producer-direction routing headers: when the route republishes through a Dapr producer, DaprConfigurationOptionsProxy reads them back and prefers them over the destination configured on the endpoint. As a result, in a route that consumes from one Dapr Pub/Sub topic and republishes to another (for example from('dapr-pubsub:p:t').to('dapr-pubsub:p:other')), an actor able to publish a message to the subscribed topic could set the CloudEvent's pub/sub-name and topic to values of their choosing and cause the re-published message to be delivered to an arbitrary Dapr Pub/Sub component and topic instead of the configured destination - redirecting or exfiltrating the message and bypassing the route's intended routing and any topic-level access controls in the underlying broker. Exploitation requires the ability to publish to the topic the route subscribes to; no other authentication or user interaction is needed. This issue affects Apache Camel: from 4.12.0 before 4.14.8, from 4.15.0 before 4.18.3, from 4.19.0 before 4.21.0. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 4.21.0, which fixes the issue. If users are on the 4.14.x LTS releases stream, then they are suggested to upgrade to 4.14.8. If users are on the 4.18.x releases stream, then they are suggested to upgrade to 4.18.3. For deployments that cannot upgrade immediately, remove the CamelDaprPubSubName and CamelDaprTopic headers from the Exchange between the Dapr consumer and any Dapr producer in the route (for example removeHeaders('CamelDaprPubSubName', 'CamelDaprTopic')), and restrict who can publish to the subscribed Dapr Pub/Sub topic so that only trusted producers can send to it.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI

T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Access
Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network.
Why these techniques?

Vulnerability allows untrusted CloudEvent inputs to manipulate Dapr producer routing headers, enabling message redirection/exfiltration via exploitation of the exposed Camel/Dapr integration component.

Confidence: MEDIUM · MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise v19.0

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-46592Same product: Apache Camel
CVE-2026-46457Same product: Apache Camel
CVE-2026-46454Same product: Apache Camel
CVE-2026-46456Same product: Apache Camel
CVE-2026-49042Same product: Apache Camel
CVE-2026-49097Same product: Apache Camel
CVE-2026-46585Same product: Apache Camel
CVE-2026-48206Same product: Apache Camel
CVE-2026-48204Same product: Apache Camel
CVE-2026-49098Same product: Apache Camel

Affected Assets

apache
camel
4.12.0 — 4.14.8 · 4.15.0 — 4.18.3 · 4.19.0 — 4.21.0

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)
  • SI-10 Information Input Validation
  • AC-4 Information Flow Enforcement
  • AC-3 Access Enforcement
Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)
  • 6 hardening rules · 3 OS baselines
Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V3.2.1
  • V3.5.1
  • V3.5.3
  • V3.5.8

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

prevent

Directly blocks the root cause by requiring validation and sanitization of untrusted CloudEvent fields before they are copied into Camel routing headers.

prevent

Enforces information flow policies so that producer routing decisions use only trusted endpoint configuration and ignore attacker-supplied headers.

prevent

Ensures the Dapr producer component enforces access-control decisions based on its own configured destination rather than values supplied in message headers.

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.

PR.AA-04 mostly match
prevents

Proper conveyance and verification of original identity assertions directly prevents loss of request source when forwarding.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly require and enforce input validation during development.

PR.AA-05 partial match
prevents

Enforcing least-privilege authorizations on forwarded requests reduces confused-deputy abuse even if source identity is lost.

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.

detects

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.

prevents

Access-control rules can limit which upstream identities may cause the product to act on their behalf, reducing confused-deputy risk.

prevents

Proper identity management ensures the original requester identity is preserved and validated before the product forwards requests.

degrades

Explicit access-rights assignment can restrict the product’s ability to act as an unintended proxy for external actors.

degrades

Privileged-access controls limit the rights the product may exercise on behalf of upstream callers, mitigating confused-deputy abuse.

degrades

Network-security controls can enforce source validation and prevent the product from blindly proxying traffic to external actors.

References