CVE の説明

Improper Neutralization of Special Elements Used in a Template Engine and Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor vulnerability in Apache Camel HTTP, Netty HTTP, Undertow and Vert.x HTTP components. This issue affects Apache Camel: from 4.0.0 before 4.18.5, from 4.19.0 before 4.22.1. The Camel HTTP producer families let an inbound message override the endpoint URI through the CamelHttpUri and CamelRestHttpUri headers, and then passed that message-supplied string through CamelContext.resolvePropertyPlaceholders() before using it. Property-placeholder resolution is a configuration-resolution facility, not a URI-parsing step: it reaches operating-system environment variables, JVM system properties, every PropertiesFunction registered on the classpath - including the secret functions - and, through camel-bean, the invocation of a no-argument method on any bean in the registry. Applying it to Exchange content therefore turned a URI string into a configuration- and bean-evaluation context. A route author opted into none of this: a plain static to("http://backend/api") was sufficient. Seven call sites were affected: HttpHelper.createURL and HttpHelper.createMethod in camel-http-common, HttpMethodHelper.createMethod in camel-http, VertxHttpHelper.resolveHttpURI in camel-vertx-http, UndertowHelper.createURL and UndertowHelper.createMethod in camel-undertow, and NettyHttpHelper.createURL in camel-netty-http. The bridgeEndpoint option did not bound the exposure: it suppresses the CamelHttpUri override in the createURL family but not in the createMethod family, so a route using the documented bridging configuration still resolved placeholders taken from the header, and CamelRestHttpUri was consumed before any bridgeEndpoint check in all four components. Only camel-http offered an opt-out, skipControlHeaders, which defaults to false. Reaching the headers did not always require header injection, because several Camel HTTP consumers populate CamelHttpUri from the request line themselves as a documented reverse-proxy feature. An unresolvable placeholder additionally produced a RuntimeExchangeException whose message echoed the URI, which distinguishes a set from an unset configuration key even where no outbound request is made. The behaviour predates the 4.x line. This advisory continues the alignment CAMEL-24282 applied to the toD and enrich dynamic-URI EIPs in 4.22.0, extending the same build-time-resolution contract to the HTTP producer components. Users should upgrade to version 4.23.0, which fixes the issue. Users on the 4.22.x releases stream should upgrade to 4.22.1. Users on the 4.18.x releases stream should upgrade to 4.18.5. The 4.14.x releases stream and earlier reached end of life before this issue was resolved and will not receive a fix, so deployments on those lines must move to a supported release. For deployments that cannot upgrade immediately, strip the override headers at the trust boundary before the producer with removeHeader("CamelHttpUri") and removeHeader("CamelRestHttpUri"), or set skipControlHeaders=true on camel-http endpoints, which is the only component offering that option. Note that bridgeEndpoint=true is not a workaround: it suppresses the header override when the outbound URL is built but not when the header is re-parsed for the query string. Percent-encoding the placeholder delimiters is likewise not a mitigation for camel-netty-http, whose binding decodes the request path before the value reaches the header, so proxy or WAF rules written against the raw delimiters do not help there. As defence in depth, ensure consumers exposed to untrusted senders apply a strict inbound HeaderFilterStrategy over the Camel namespace, and resolve secrets through a vault rather than through environment variables or system properties that a placeholder can name.

CVE の情報

関連する弱点

CWE-ID	弱点名	出典
CWE-200	Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor The product exposes sensitive information to an actor that is not explicitly authorized to have access to that information.
CWE-1336	Improper Neutralization of Special Elements Used in a Template Engine The product uses a template engine to insert or process externally-influenced input, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements or syntax that can be interpreted as template expressions or other code directives when processed by the engine.

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	8.2	HIGH	CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:L/A:N 詳細情報 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. High There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server. Integrity Impact This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Low Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on 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.	security@apache.org