Home/CVE/Improper Input Validation, Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor vulnerability in Apache Camel Mail
CVE

CVE-2026-46584

Improper Input Validation, Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor vulnerability in Apache Camel Mail

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.

LOW · CVSS 3.7 EPSS 0.00225
EPSS exploitation odds0.22% · top 86%
Monitor
  • No active-exploitation, high-EPSS, or public-exploit signals - routine patching cadence
Look this up elsewhere - one-click external pivots
How to read a CVE - triage first, then detect and patch
This page is every public fact about CVE-2026-46584, cross-linked. Its job is to answer one question fast - does this need my attention now? - and then hand you the two things you do about it. Here is how an analyst reads it.
Triage: should I act now? Four signals, and they are not interchangeable:
CVSSseverity - how bad it is IF exploited, 0-10. A high CVSS alone is not urgency; a flaw can be a perfect 10 and never actually be attacked. EPSSprobability - a model’s estimate of the chance it is exploited in the next 30 days, 0-1. This is the “will it actually happen” signal. CISA KEVconfirmed - it is being exploited in the wild right now. The strongest signal on the page; KEV beats any score. Weaponisedavailability - public exploits / PoCs, and especially Metasploit modules rated Excellent / Great. Reliable, packaged exploit code means low-skill attackers can use it today.
How they combine: KEV, or a dependable Metasploit module, means patch now regardless of CVSS. High CVSS + low EPSS + no exploit is real but not an emergency - schedule it. Low CVSS but KEV-listed still gets patched now. The verdict above already weighed these for you; this is how it got there.
Then what - two workflows:
Detectwhen you cannot patch today, follow this CVE to the ATT&CK techniques it enables, then Build a SIEM detection (the green button) - author a rule, test it in Atomic, deploy it. That buys visibility while the patch waits. PatchAffected products / packages tell you if you are exposed; Fixed versions by distribution and Vendor advisories give the exact version that closes it.
Reading order for the panels below: verdict + badges, then Public exploits / Metasploit (is it weaponised), then ATT&CK techniques + Sigma / IDS rules (can I detect it), then Affected products / packages + Fixed versions (am I exposed, what patches it), then Threat actors / IOCs (who uses it), then Scoring & timeline / references (the evidence).

Severity & exploitation scoring

View on NVD →
CVSS base score
3.7
LOWCVSS v3.1 · [email protected]
EPSS exploitation probability
0.22%
Top 86%odds of exploitation in the next 30 days
CVSS metric silhouette
VectorComplexityPrivilegesInteractionScopeConfidentialityIntegrityAvailability
shape grows toward worst-case
SSVC triage · cisa-vulnrichment
Exploitation
none
Automatable
no
Tech impact
partial
CVSS vector breakdown
Exploitability - how they get in
Attack Vector
Network Adjacent Local Physical
Attack Complexity
Low High
Privileges Required
None Low High
User Interaction
None Required
Scope
Unchanged Changed
Impact - what breaks
Confidentiality
None Low High
Integrity
None Low High
Availability
None Low High
VECTORCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N

ATT&CK techniques

1

Techniques this CVE enables. Pills with a solid outline are high confidence - named directly in ATT&CK or Nuclei, or human-curated by CTID; the rest are inferred from the weakness type using MITRE's CVE Mapping Methodology and the CWE → CAPEC chain. Broad, generic-weakness guesses are filtered out. A small marks a technique that N independent sources agree on.

▤ Build a SIEM detection for these techniques
🔗

References & Sources

2
Source URLs (vendor pages, mailing lists, write-ups). Exploit/PoC links are in their own section above to avoid duplication.