Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-80351

RCE in Apache Camel 2.0.0 – 2.9.3

Published
10 September 2026
Modified
14 September 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 9.8
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0054 44th percentile
Risk Priority 72 floored blend · peak EPSS

CVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.

Summary

CVE-2026-80351 is a critical-severity Eval Injection (CWE-95) vulnerability in Apache Camel. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked at the 44th 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 SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SA-15 (Development Process, Standards, and Tools) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Improper neutralization of directives in dynamically evaluated code ('eval injection') vulnerability in Apache Camel K. An improper neutralization of directives in dynamically evaluated Maven configuration allows tenant-controlled repository content to influence code execution within the operator pod, potentially enabling tenants…

more

to execute arbitrary code with the privileges of the operator. This issue affects Apache Camel K: from 2.0.0 before 2.9.3, from 2.10.1 before 2.10.2. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 2.9.3, 2.10.2 or 2.11.0, which fixes the issue.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1059 Command and Scripting Interpreter Execution
Adversaries may abuse command and script interpreters to execute commands, scripts, or binaries.
T1059.001 PowerShell Execution
Adversaries may abuse PowerShell commands and scripts for execution.
T1059.004 Unix Shell Execution
Adversaries may abuse Unix shell commands and scripts for execution.
T1059.005 Visual Basic Execution
Adversaries may abuse Visual Basic (VB) for execution.
T1059.006 Python Execution
Adversaries may abuse Python commands and scripts for execution.
T1059.007 JavaScript Execution
Adversaries may abuse various implementations of JavaScript for execution.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-80352Same product: Apache Camel
CVE-2026-40047Same product: Apache Camel
CVE-2025-30177Same product: Apache Camel
CVE-2025-29891Same product: Apache Camel
CVE-2026-49099Same product: Apache Camel
CVE-2026-49097Same product: Apache Camel
CVE-2026-49098Same product: Apache Camel
CVE-2026-48203Same product: Apache Camel
CVE-2026-33454Same product: Apache Camel
CVE-2026-46592Same product: Apache Camel

Affected Assets

apache
camel
2.0.0 — 2.9.3 · 2.10.0 — 2.10.2

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V1.3.2

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Developer testing and code analysis can discover eval-injection flaws but does not stop their introduction.

Secure-development standards and tools can mandate safe coding patterns that avoid unsafe dynamic evaluation.

Input validation explicitly requires neutralizing untrusted data before it reaches dynamic evaluation constructs such as eval.

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.PS-06 partial match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly require input neutralization and avoidance of unsafe dynamic evaluation.

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.

prevents

Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and safe coding practices that directly prevent eval injection.

prevents

Application security requirements include rules against dynamic code execution of untrusted input.

prevents

Secure architecture principles discourage unsafe dynamic evaluation constructs.

prevents

Secure coding explicitly requires neutralization of input before dynamic evaluation, directly mitigating eval injection.

finds

Security testing in development can detect eval injection vulnerabilities before deployment.

References