CVE-2026-49098 : 詳細

CVE-2026-49098

5.3
/
中
2026-07-06
09h16 +00:00
A03-Injection
Network
2026-07-08
03h11 +00:00
特定のCVEの通知
特定のCVEの変更情報をいち早くお届けします。
通知を管理する

CVE の説明

Improper Input Validation, Improper Neutralization of Special Elements in Output Used by a Downstream Component ('Injection') vulnerability in Apache Camel Kafka Component. The camel-kafka producer can override its configured target topic at runtime from the kafka.OVERRIDE_TOPIC Exchange header: KafkaProducer.evaluateTopic() returns the header value in preference to the topic configured on the endpoint. The control-header constants in KafkaConstants (for example OVERRIDE_TOPIC = kafka.OVERRIDE_TOPIC, OVERRIDE_TIMESTAMP = kafka.OVERRIDE_TIMESTAMP, PARTITION_KEY = kafka.PARTITION_KEY) used plain, non-Camel-prefixed values. camel-kafka's own KafkaHeaderFilterStrategy does filter the kafka.* namespace, but only on the Kafka-to-Exchange serialization boundary (reading Kafka record headers into the Exchange, and writing Exchange headers into a Kafka record); it does not apply to headers that arrive from an upstream consumer in a multi-component route. The upstream HTTP consumer uses HttpHeaderFilterStrategy, which blocks only the Camel / camel namespace, so a kafka.* header passes through unfiltered. As a result, in a route that bridges an HTTP consumer (for example platform-http) into a kafka: producer, any HTTP client could set the kafka.OVERRIDE_TOPIC header and cause the message to be published to an arbitrary Kafka topic instead of the configured one - redirecting it to a sensitive internal topic, or injecting attacker-crafted messages into a topic consumed by a critical downstream service. The related kafka.OVERRIDE_TIMESTAMP and kafka.PARTITION_KEY headers could likewise be injected to backdate messages or target specific partitions. No credentials are required when the bridging consumer is unauthenticated. 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, routes that set or read Kafka headers via the raw header names must use the CamelKafka* names (for example CamelKafkaOverrideTopic and CamelKafkaTopic) instead of the old kafka.* values. For deployments that cannot upgrade immediately, strip the kafka.* headers from any untrusted ingress before the kafka: producer (for example removeHeaders('kafka.*') at the start of the route), and set the target topic from a trusted source.

CVE の情報

関連する弱点

CWE-ID 弱点名 出典
CWE-20 Improper Input Validation
The product receives input or data, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the input has the properties that are required to process the data safely and correctly.
CWE-74 Improper Neutralization of Special Elements in Output Used by a Downstream Component
The product constructs all or part of a command, data structure, or record using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify how it is parsed or interpreted when it is sent to a downstream component.

メトリクス

メトリクス スコア 深刻度 CVSS ベクター 出典
V3.1 5.3 MEDIUM CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N

Base: Exploitabilty Metrics

The Exploitability metrics reflect the characteristics of the thing that is vulnerable, which we refer to formally as the vulnerable component.

Attack Vector

This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible.

Network

The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).

Attack Complexity

This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker’s control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability.

Low

Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success when attacking the vulnerable component.

Privileges Required

This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability.

None

The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.

User Interaction

This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable component.

None

The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any user.

Base: Scope Metrics

The Scope metric captures whether a vulnerability in one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.

Scope

Formally, a security authority is a mechanism (e.g., an application, an operating system, firmware, a sandbox environment) that defines and enforces access control in terms of how certain subjects/actors (e.g., human users, processes) can access certain restricted objects/resources (e.g., files, CPU, memory) in a controlled manner. All the subjects and objects under the jurisdiction of a single security authority are considered to be under one security scope. If a vulnerability in a vulnerable component can affect a component which is in a different security scope than the vulnerable component, a Scope change occurs. Intuitively, whenever the impact of a vulnerability breaches a security/trust boundary and impacts components outside the security scope in which vulnerable component resides, a Scope change occurs.

Unchanged

An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.

Base: Impact Metrics

The Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability on the component that suffers the worst outcome that is most directly and predictably associated with the attack. Analysts should constrain impacts to a reasonable, final outcome which they are confident an attacker is able to achieve.

Confidentiality Impact

This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information resources managed by a software component due to a successfully exploited vulnerability.

Low

There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.

Integrity Impact

This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information.

None

There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.

Availability Impact

This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability.

None

There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Temporal Metrics

The Temporal metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability, the existence of any patches or workarounds, or the confidence in the description of a vulnerability.

Environmental Metrics

These metrics enable the analyst to customize the CVSS score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability.

134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0

関連製品

構成 0

Apache>>Camel >> Version ~から(含む) 4.0.0 ~まで(含まない) 4.14.8

Apache>>Camel >> Version ~から(含む) 4.15.0 ~まで(含まない) 4.18.3

Apache>>Camel >> Version ~から(含む) 4.19.0 ~まで(含まない) 4.21.0

参考資料

http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2026/07/05/23
Tags : Mailing List, Third Party Advisory