Improper Input Validation, Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor vulnerability in Apache Camel Mail Component.
The camel-mail producer (MailProducer.getSender) scanned the outgoing Exchange for message headers in the mail.smtp. / mail.smtps. namespace and, when any were present, built a per-message JavaMail sender with those values applied as JavaMail session properties, overriding the endpoint configuration. This namespace is Camel-internal - only MailProducer interprets it - and was not blocked by any HeaderFilterStrategy, so the values could originate from any inbound protocol (for example platform-http query parameters or request headers, or JMS / Kafka messages from untrusted producers) that feeds a route ending in an smtp / smtps producer without an intervening removeHeaders. The maximal impact is version-dependent: on releases before 4.19.0, setting mail.smtp.host redirects the SMTP connection to a server under the attacker's control, and because the producer then authenticates with the endpoint's configured username and password those credentials are transmitted to the attacker; on 4.19.0 and later the producer connects to the endpoint's configured host explicitly, so the reachable impact is limited to weakening transport security (for example mail.smtp.ssl.trust, mail.smtp.starttls.enable or mail.smtp.socks.host) and interception of the outgoing message rather than host redirect. Exploitation requires a route that channels untrusted input into the mail producer without stripping the namespace.
This issue affects Apache Camel: from 4.0.0 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. After upgrading, the per-message override is disabled by default; enable it only on trusted endpoints with useJavaMailSessionPropertiesFromHeaders=true. For deployments that cannot upgrade immediately, strip the namespace before the mail producer with removeHeaders('mail.smtp.*') and removeHeaders('mail.smtps.*') between any untrusted ingress and the smtp / smtps producer. Even with the opt-in enabled, route authors should still strip the namespace on any path that carries untrusted input.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (3.7): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 3.7 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 3.7 LOWCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.6% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-24). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at every mission impact level.CISA BOD 26-04: 60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at every mission impact level.
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it