Generation of Error Message Containing Sensitive Information vulnerability in Apache Camel Undertow Component.
The camel-undertow HTTP server consumer exposes a muteException option that controls what is returned to the client when a route processing error occurs. This option defaulted to false, whereas the other Camel HTTP server components (camel-http / camel-jetty / camel-servlet and camel-platform-http) default it to true. With muteException=false, when a request triggers an exception during route processing the consumer writes the full Throwable stack trace into the HTTP response body as text/plain instead of returning an empty body. Any unauthenticated client that can reach the endpoint and cause a processing error - for example by sending a malformed request body, an invalid parameter, or otherwise triggering a route-internal failure - therefore receives a complete Java stack trace. Such a stack trace can disclose sensitive internal information, including credentials embedded in exception messages, internal host names and IP addresses, filesystem paths, dependency and version details, database and class names, and the application's internal structure, which an attacker can use to plan further attacks. In addition, for Rest DSL consumers the muteException option was not honoured at all: the RestUndertowHttpBinding was created with a hard-coded false, so the stack trace was returned even when muteException=true had been configured.
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. For deployments that cannot upgrade immediately, set muteException=true explicitly on the camel-undertow consumer (for example undertow: http://0.0.0.0:8080/api?muteException=true , or globally via the camel.component.undertow.mute-exception=true property), so that processing errors no longer return the stack trace to the client; note that on affected releases this workaround does not cover Rest DSL consumers, whose binding ignores the option until the fix is applied.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (5.3): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 5.3 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 5.3 MEDIUMCVSS-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 low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days 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 low or medium mission impact; Attend at high (mission-essential systems).
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines at low or medium mission impact and sooner than that at high.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable yes (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)14 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; 60 days if it is not.
The score's inputs: In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable yes (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