CVE 설명

Deserialization of Untrusted Data vulnerability in Apache Camel Camel-Jgroups component. This issue affects Apache Camel: from 4.0.0 before 4.18.5, from 4.19.0 before 4.22.1. JGroupsEndpoint.createExchange(Message), which CamelJGroupsReceiver calls for every message the jgroups consumer receives before the exchange is routed, set the exchange body from org.jgroups.Message.getObject(). For an ObjectMessage, which is the message type the Camel jgroups producer sends, JGroups Java-deserializes the payload through an ObjectInputStream on its own receive thread as the message arrives, and getObject() returns the resulting object. No java.io.ObjectInputFilter was applied on that path unless the deployment had set a JVM-wide serialization filter: camel-jgroups installed none, and the JGroups versions shipped with the affected releases apply none of their own, so any serializable class on the application classpath could be instantiated and its deserialization callbacks run. Unless a channel or the channelProperties option is configured, the consumer creates its channel with new JChannel(), the stock JGroups protocol stack, which multicasts over UDP without the AUTH protocol and without encryption, so any host able to reach the cluster's multicast group or bind port can join the cluster and send messages to the consumer without credentials. Such a host could send a crafted serialized object that leads to remote code execution in the Camel process when a usable deserialization gadget chain is present on the classpath, and no non-default option was required on the consumer. Because JGroups materializes the object before Camel's receiver runs, a check performed by Camel can only inspect the deserialized result and cannot stop code that runs during deserialization, so closing the issue also requires a control that applies before the payload is read, as described in the mitigation. Exploitation requires network access to the cluster's multicast group or bind port, which with the default UDP multicast transport means a host on an adjacent network, and a usable gadget chain on the classpath, which is why the severity is assessed as high rather than critical. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 4.23.0, which fixes the issue. If users are on the 4.22.x releases stream, then they are suggested to upgrade to 4.22.1. If users are on the 4.18.x releases stream, then they are suggested to upgrade to 4.18.5. The 4.14.x releases stream and earlier, and the 4.15.x to 4.17.x and 4.19.x to 4.21.x release lines, 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.

CVE 정보

관련 약점

CWE-ID	약점 이름	출처
CWE-502	Deserialization of Untrusted Data The product deserializes untrusted data without sufficiently ensuring that the resulting data will be valid.

메트릭

메트릭	점수	심각도	CVSS 벡터	출처
V3.1	8.8	HIGH	CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H 추가 정보 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. Adjacent The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack, but the attack is limited at the protocol level to a logically adjacent topology. This can mean an attack must be launched from the same shared physical (e.g., Bluetooth or IEEE 802.11) or logical (e.g., local IP subnet) network, or from within a secure or otherwise limited administrative domain (e.g., MPLS, secure VPN to an administrative network zone). 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. High There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component. Availability Impact This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. High There is a total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable). 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