Home/CVE/Improper Input Validation vulnerability in Apache ActiveMQ Broker, Apache ActiveMQ, Apache ActiveMQ All.
An attacker th
CVE
CVE-2026-49434
Improper Input Validation vulnerability in Apache ActiveMQ Broker, Apache ActiveMQ, Apache ActiveMQ All.
An attacker th
Improper Input Validation vulnerability in Apache ActiveMQ Broker, Apache ActiveMQ, Apache ActiveMQ All. An attacker that has access to publish or modify entries in LDAP that match the configured searchBase and searchFilter can instantiate denied transports inside the broker JVM. This can be used to fetch an attacker URL and spawn a second BrokerService inside the same JVM. This issue affects Apache ActiveMQ Broker: before 5.19.8, from 6.0.0 before 6.2.7.
Apache ActiveMQ: before 5.19.8, from 6.0.0 before 6.2.7.
Apache ActiveMQ All: before 5.19.8, from 6.0.0 before 6.2.7. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 6.2.7 or 5.19.8, which fixes the issue.
HIGH · CVSS 7.5
Schedule remediation
- CVSS base score ≥ 7.0
No Sigma yet — build one →
YARA rules0
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-2026-49434, 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).
EPSS exploitation probability
n/a
No EPSS score in our data for this CVE. EPSS is published daily for scored CVEs - a very new, reserved, or rejected CVE may not have one yet.
CVSS metric silhouette
shape grows toward worst-case
SSVC triage
No SSVC vulnrichment for this CVE. CISA's Vulnrichment program scores newer CVEs (~2024 onwards) plus selected older critical ones. Use the EPSS probability + KEV status to triage instead.
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
VECTOR
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N◆
ATT&CK techniques
1Techniques 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.
▤ Build a SIEM detection for these techniques▤
CAPEC attack patterns
12Attack patterns this CVE enables - the bridge from weakness to ATT&CK technique.
CAPEC-CAPEC-10 · Buffer Overflow via Environment Variables CAPEC-CAPEC-101 · Server Side Include (SSI) Injection CAPEC-CAPEC-104 · Cross Zone Scripting CAPEC-CAPEC-108 · Command Line Execution through SQL Injection CAPEC-CAPEC-109 · Object Relational Mapping Injection CAPEC-CAPEC-110 · SQL Injection through SOAP Parameter Tampering CAPEC-CAPEC-120 · Double Encoding CAPEC-CAPEC-13 · Subverting Environment Variable Values CAPEC-CAPEC-135 · Format String Injection CAPEC-CAPEC-136 · LDAP Injection CAPEC-CAPEC-14 · Client-side Injection-induced Buffer Overflow CAPEC-CAPEC-153 · Input Data Manipulation
⬡
Weakness Classification
▤
Related CVEs
4CVEs linked to this one by a shared weakness (CWE) or affected product - joins on data already in the engine, with the reason shown per row.
CVE-1999-0265
ICMP redirect messages may crash or lock up a host.
same CWE-20
CVE-1999-0726
An attacker can conduct a denial of service in Windows NT by executing a program...
same CWE-20
CVE-1999-0918
Denial of service in various Windows systems via malformed, fragmented IGMP pack...
3
same CWE-20
CVE-1999-0721
Denial of service in Windows NT Local Security Authority (LSA) through a malform...
same CWE-20
🔗
References & Sources
2Source URLs (vendor pages, mailing lists, write-ups). Exploit/PoC links are in their own section above to avoid duplication.