CVE-2026-46585

Home/CVE/Improper Input Validation, Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key vulnerability in Apache Camel Lucene Compone

CVE

↯ PDF report

Improper Input Validation, Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key vulnerability in Apache Camel Lucene Compone

Improper Input Validation, Authorization Bypass Through User-Controlled Key vulnerability in Apache Camel Lucene Component. The camel-lucene producer reads the search phrase from an Exchange header (LuceneConstants.HEADER_QUERY) whose value was the plain string QUERY (and RETURN_LUCENE_DOCS for HEADER_RETURN_LUCENE_DOCS). Because these names do not start with the Camel / camel prefix, HttpHeaderFilterStrategy - which blocks only the Camel header namespace on the HTTP boundary - let them pass from an inbound HTTP request straight into the Exchange.

In a route that exposes a Lucene query operation behind an HTTP consumer (for example platform-http), any HTTP client could therefore set the QUERY header and have its value executed against the full-text index, overriding the query the route intended to run. Depending on what is indexed, this allows reading documents the request should not have access to (for example a match-all query returns the entire index, or the route's intended per-user filter can be replaced), and expensive regular-expression queries can consume significant CPU. No credentials are required when the HTTP 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 the query via the raw header name must use CamelLuceneQuery (and CamelLuceneReturnLuceneDocs) instead of QUERY / RETURN_LUCENE_DOCS. For deployments that cannot upgrade immediately, strip the attacker-controllable headers before the Lucene producer and set the query from a trusted source (for example removeHeader('QUERY') and removeHeader('RETURN_LUCENE_DOCS'), then setHeader('QUERY', constant(...)) at the start of the route).

HIGH · CVSS 7.5 EPSS 0.00287

EPSS exploitation odds0.29% · top 79%

Schedule remediation

SSVC automatable: yes - attacks can be scripted at scale
CVSS base score ≥ 7.0

No Sigma yet — build one → YARA rules0

Look this up elsewhere - one-click external pivots

NVD CVE.org CISA Exploit-DB GitHub PoC VulnCheck KEV GreyNoise

▸ How to read a CVE - triage first, then detect and patch

This page is every public fact about CVE-2026-46585, 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

7.5

HIGHCVSS v3.1 · [email protected]

EPSS exploitation probability

0.29%

Top 79%odds of exploitation in the next 30 days

CVSS metric silhouette

shape grows toward worst-case

SSVC triage · cisa-vulnrichment

Exploitation

none

Automatable

yes

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:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N

Attack path

Full kill chain

→

◆

ATT&CK techniques

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 N× marks a technique that N independent sources agree on.

T1190 · Exploit Public-Facing Application

▤ Build a SIEM detection for these techniques