‹ Back to list

CVE-2026-85243

Status: Awaiting AnalysisMedium (5.9)—PoC
Severity5.9Medium · CVSS 3.1
Exploitation probability0.22 %higher than 11% of CVEs
Active exploitationNonot in the CISA catalog
Public exploitAvailableProof of concept on GitHub (unverified)

Improper Validation of Integrity Check Value vulnerability in Apache Camel Crypto PGP component.

This issue affects Apache Camel: from 4.0.0 before 4.18.5, from 4.19.0 before 4.22.1.

unmarshal() verified the modification detection code only when the message was an OpenPGP symmetrically encrypted integrity protected data packet. The older symmetrically encrypted data packet carries no such code, and OpenPGP's CFB mode is malleable without one, so a message using that packet skipped the check altogether.

Read full descriptionShow less

The packet type is chosen by whoever produced the message, which left the sender - or anyone able to rewrite the message in transit - deciding whether the integrity check applied at all. The existing integrity option governs marshalling only and had no decrypt-side counterpart, so a deployment could not require integrity protection on the messages it accepted.

Upgrade to Apache Camel 4.23.0, which fixes the issue. Users on the 4.18.x LTS releases stream should upgrade to 4.18.5. Users on the 4.22.x LTS releases stream should upgrade to 4.22.1. A requireIntegrityProtection option, defaulting to true, now rejects a message that is not integrity protected. Note that signatureVerificationOption still defaults to optional, so a message carrying no signature is accepted; the two options together are what give a decrypted message authenticity and not only confidentiality. For deployments that cannot upgrade immediately, reject messages that do not use the integrity protected packet before they reach the data format. Routes that must interoperate with a sender still emitting the legacy packet should set requireIntegrityProtection=false after upgrading, and treat the decrypted content as unauthenticated.

CVSS

Base score
5.9
Version
3.1
Vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N

Exploitation probability (EPSS)

Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days
0.22 %
Percentile among all scored CVEs
11
Score date
10/20/2026

EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System, FIRST) estimates how likely a vulnerability is to be exploited in the wild within 30 days. It complements CVSS (impact) and CISA KEV (confirmed exploitation).

Public exploits

Exploit code or detection templates are publicly available. This is not the same as confirmed active exploitation (KEV), but it raises the risk: patch with priority.

⚠️ GitHub proofs of concept are not verified: some are fake or contain malware. Never run them outside an isolated lab.

ATT&CK techniques

How this vulnerability is exploited and what the attacker gains, in MITRE ATT&CK terms.

El vector es AV:N/PR:N/UI:N y el texto indica que el remitente o un intermediario elige el paquete sin verificación de integridad, permitiendo alterar el contenido descifrado en tránsito.

Inferred by our analysis agent from the official description, CVSS vector and CWE, and checked by a supervisor. May contain errors.

ATT&CK mitigations that cover these techniques

Vulnerability ScanningPrivileged Account ManagementNetwork SegmentationLimit Access to Resource Over NetworkFilter Network TrafficEncrypt Sensitive Information

Affected technologies (1)

⚠ AI-inferred from the description — NVD hasn't analyzed this CVE yet, these aren't verified CPEs.

Apache — CamelAI

CWEs

References

Show 5 references

Raw JSON (NVD)

Show
{
  "id": "CVE-2026-85243",
  "cveTags": [],
  "metrics": {
    "ssvcV203": [
      {
        "source": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
        "ssvcData": {
          "id": "CVE-2026-85243",
          "role": "CISA Coordinator",
          "options": [
            {
              "exploitation": "none"
            },
            {
              "automatable": "no"
            },
            {
              "technicalImpact": "partial"
            }
          ],
          "version": "2.0.3",
          "timestamp": "2026-10-19T18:34:06.410581Z"
        }
      }
    ],
    "cvssMetricV31": [
      {
        "type": "Secondary",
        "source": "security@apache.org",
        "cvssData": {
          "scope": "UNCHANGED",
          "version": "3.1",
          "baseScore": 5.9,
          "attackVector": "NETWORK",
          "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
          "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N",
          "integrityImpact": "HIGH",
          "userInteraction": "NONE",
          "attackComplexity": "HIGH",
          "availabilityImpact": "NONE",
          "privilegesRequired": "NONE",
          "confidentialityImpact": "NONE"
        },
        "impactScore": 3.6,
        "exploitabilityScore": 2.2
      }
    ]
  },
  "affected": [
    {
      "source": "security@apache.org",
      "affectedData": [
        {
          "vendor": "Apache Software Foundation",
          "product": "Apache Camel",
          "versions": [
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "4.0.0",
              "lessThan": "4.18.5",
              "versionType": "maven"
            },
            {
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "4.19.0",
              "lessThan": "4.22.1",
              "versionType": "maven"
            },
            {
              "status": "unaffected",
              "version": "4.18.5",
              "versionType": "maven"
            },
            {
              "status": "unaffected",
              "version": "4.22.1",
              "versionType": "maven"
            },
            {
              "status": "unaffected",
              "version": "4.23.0",
              "versionType": "maven"
            }
          ],
          "packageURL": "pkg:maven/org.apache.camel/camel-crypto-pgp",
          "packageName": "org.apache.camel:camel-crypto-pgp",
          "collectionURL": "https://repo.maven.apache.org/maven2",
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "published": "2026-10-19T11:17:22.367",
  "references": [
    {
      "url": "https://camel.apache.org/security/CVE-2026-85243.html",
      "source": "security@apache.org"
    },
    {
      "url": "https://github.com/apache/camel/pull/25848",
      "source": "security@apache.org"
    },
    {
      "url": "https://github.com/apache/camel/pull/25944",
      "source": "security@apache.org"
    },
    {
      "url": "https://github.com/apache/camel/pull/25946",
      "source": "security@apache.org"
    },
    {
      "url": "https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-24441",
      "source": "security@apache.org"
    }
  ],
  "vulnStatus": "Awaiting Analysis",
  "weaknesses": [
    {
      "type": "Secondary",
      "source": "security@apache.org",
      "description": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "CWE-354"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "descriptions": [
    {
      "lang": "en",
      "value": "Improper Validation of Integrity Check Value vulnerability in Apache Camel Crypto PGP component.\n\nThis issue affects Apache Camel: from 4.0.0 before 4.18.5, from 4.19.0 before 4.22.1.\n\nunmarshal() verified the modification detection code only when the message was an OpenPGP symmetrically encrypted integrity protected data packet. The older symmetrically encrypted data packet carries no such code, and OpenPGP's CFB mode is malleable without one, so a message using that packet skipped the check altogether. The packet type is chosen by whoever produced the message, which left the sender - or anyone able to rewrite the message in transit - deciding whether the integrity check applied at all. The existing integrity option governs marshalling only and had no decrypt-side counterpart, so a deployment could not require integrity protection on the messages it accepted.\n\nUpgrade to Apache Camel 4.23.0, which fixes the issue. Users on the 4.18.x LTS releases stream should upgrade to 4.18.5. Users on the 4.22.x LTS releases stream should upgrade to 4.22.1. A requireIntegrityProtection option, defaulting to true, now rejects a message that is not integrity protected. Note that signatureVerificationOption still defaults to optional, so a message carrying no signature is accepted; the two options together are what give a decrypted message authenticity and not only confidentiality. For deployments that cannot upgrade immediately, reject messages that do not use the integrity protected packet before they reach the data format. Routes that must interoperate with a sender still emitting the legacy packet should set requireIntegrityProtection=false after upgrading, and treat the decrypted content as unauthenticated."
    }
  ],
  "lastModified": "2026-10-19T20:45:51.597",
  "sourceIdentifier": "security@apache.org"
}