`CVE-2026-85243` Apache Camel

Affected software	Apache Camel
Severity	5.9 Medium CVSS 3.1
Weakness	CWE-354
Published	19 Oct 2026
Updated	3 Nov 2026

Published 25 days ago. NVD often adds the list of affected products days or weeks after a CVE is published, and the other sources we check lag too. The scope and status here may change.

Description

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. 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.

Exploitation status

No public exploit

No exploit has been reported in the sources we check. The 1 repository below are public GitHub repositories with fewer than 5 stars.

CISA KEV not listed
VulnCheck KEV not listed
CISA Vulnrichment exploitation: none
Indexed PoC 1 indexed, none at 5+ stars
EPSS 0.37% chance in 30 days

1 of these are GitHub repositories with fewer than 5 stars. They are listed for reference and don't count toward the exploitation status above.

Index	Artifact	Stars	First seen
GitHub PoC	Reproducer for CVE-2026-85243 — Apache Camel camel-crypto-pgp integrity verification downgrade (CWE-354); Spring Boot + Quarkus, affected vs fixed		2026-10-19

Index

Artifact

Stars

First seen

GitHub PoC

Reproducer for CVE-2026-85243 — Apache Camel camel-crypto-pgp integrity verification downgrade (CWE-354); Spring Boot + Quarkus, affected vs fixed

2026-10-19

Waratek protection

No exploit published

Within Waratek scope. In the sources we check, nobody has published exploit code for this CVE or reported it being exploited.

A public code fix exists: apache/camel #25848.

Protection none
Action unverified
Review automated Upstream data
Record active

Decided by	Medium or Low severity, no CISA or VulnCheck KEV listing, no PoC clearing the evidence bar, no CISA verdict, no Oracle advisory
Finding	This CVE is MEDIUM severity, is not listed in CISA KEV or VulnCheck KEV, has no public exploit or PoC in any indexed source, carries no CISA Vulnrichment finding of a demonstrated exploit, and is not part of an Oracle Critical Patch Update. None of the signals that would put it in front of an engineer is present, and the volume of CVEs below that bar is too great to take one at a time, so no rule is written for it. This is a decision about what we act on, not a finding that the CVE is harmless — a patch may well be derivable, and a low-severity defect can still be one link in a longer chain.
Candidate fix	https://github.com/apache/camel/pull/25848 : a pull request: the change under review

Decided by

Medium or Low severity, no CISA or VulnCheck KEV listing, no PoC clearing the evidence bar, no CISA verdict, no Oracle advisory

Finding

This CVE is MEDIUM severity, is not listed in CISA KEV or VulnCheck KEV, has no public exploit or PoC in any indexed source, carries no CISA Vulnrichment finding of a demonstrated exploit, and is not part of an Oracle Critical Patch Update. None of the signals that would put it in front of an engineer is present, and the volume of CVEs below that bar is too great to take one at a time, so no rule is written for it. This is a decision about what we act on, not a finding that the CVE is harmless — a patch may well be derivable, and a low-severity defect can still be one link in a longer chain.

Candidate fix

https://github.com/apache/camel/pull/25848 : a pull request: the change under review

Affected software and releases

Products and versions

1 product, 2 version entries

Source	Vendor	Product	Scheme	Affected versions
nvd	apache	camel	generic	≥ 4.0.0 and ＜ 4.18.5 · ≥ 4.19.0 and ＜ 4.22.1

Source

Vendor

Product

Scheme

Affected versions

nvd

apache

camel

generic

≥ 4.0.0 and ＜ 4.18.5 · ≥ 4.19.0 and ＜ 4.22.1

References

URL	Tags
https://github.com/apache/camel/pull/25848	pr
https://camel.apache.org/security/CVE-2026-85243.html	Mitigation, Patch, Vendor Advisory
https://github.com/apache/camel/pull/25944	Issue Tracking, Patch
https://github.com/apache/camel/pull/25946	Issue Tracking, Patch
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-24441	Issue Tracking, Patch

URL

Timeline

Published	2026-10-19	By the CVE Program.
NVD record modified	2026-11-03	NVD's own last-modified date for this record.

Published

2026-10-19

By the CVE Program.

NVD record modified

2026-11-03

NVD's own last-modified date for this record.

How VRT decided (18 of 24 rules ran)

18 of 24 rules ran. The rest didn't run because an earlier rule had already settled the CVE.

# Rule Outcome Status Detail

identity: Does this identifier describe a vulnerability at all? the first rule that matches decides

1 rejected no match CVE Program withdrawal of this identifier

scope: Is it a vulnerability Waratek protects? the first rule that matches decides

2 armr-patch-file no match An ARMR patch file on disk for this CVE

3 armr-secure-rule-file no match An ARMR security-rule template on disk for this CVE

4 manual-classification no match A researcher's recorded decision for this specific CVE

5 manual classification no match Manual classification of this CVE in the legacy dataset

6 non-java-upstream no match A root cause in non-Java code: an OS kernel, a C library, or a bundled runtime

7 oracle-component no match The defect being in a component of a tracked product the agent does not reach: JavaFX, the Java SE installer, the JInitiator browser plug-in, the native WebLogic proxy plug-in, or a native part of Oracle Application Server or Collaboration Suite (HTTP Server, Web Cache, Internet Directory, mail and calendar servers). Oracle gives these no CPE of their own and names them only in the description.

8 java-client-side no match Oracle's own risk-matrix note saying the CVE is reached only through untrusted code in the Java sandbox (applets, Web Start) or only through a client installation of Java, so a server running its own trusted code is not exposed

9 osv-maven no match An OSV.dev record of this CVE affecting a package published to Maven Central. When every such package is one business applications do not use (Minecraft mods and launchers, Fastjson) and no tracked product is named by CPE, it settles the CVE as Outside Waratek scope instead

10 cna-maven-package matched In scope CNA declares the affected component is a Maven artifact

11 known-cpe-product not reached An NVD CPE naming a product ARMR tracks

12 cna-cpe-product not reached A CPE the CNA published naming a tracked product. Oracle publishes these on advisory day, months before NVD.

13 oracle-advisory-family not reached A tracked product family named in Oracle's own risk matrix. CPE cannot carry a suite name, only a module.

14 cna-named-product not reached A tracked product named in words by the CVE's own CNA, on a record with no CPE yet. Apache and Eclipse publish these on advisory day, before NVD adds CPE data.

15 non-deployable-product not reached The only affected product being a sealed appliance image, where Java runs but no -javaagent can be attached

16 unmatched-product not reached No tracked product matched above, and none present at all

disposition: What do we do about one that is? every rule runs

17 patch-hint matched Mitigation candidate References include candidate fix URL (pr tier): https://github.com/apache/camel/pull/25848

18 open-source-maven skipped The affected package being open source on Maven, so the fix can be read

19 poc-derivable skipped An indexed exploit clearing the evidence bar to reverse-engineer, where there is no source to read

20 no-exploit skipped Nothing to build a rule from yet: no published exploit, no CISA record of exploitation and no source-level change to read

21 secure-rule-match no match A vulnerability class already blocked by an ARMR security rule

22 exploited-no-fix-or-poc skipped Somebody exploiting this CVE (a CISA or VulnCheck KEV listing, or a CISA verdict of active exploitation), with no fix, source code or PoC to build a rule from

23 below-action-threshold decided it matched No exploit published MEDIUM severity, no CISA or VulnCheck KEV listing, no public PoC clearing the evidence bar, no CISA exploitation finding, and not in an Oracle advisory — none of the signals we act on is present.

24 no-exploit-published skipped Exploit code for this candidate, published in a reviewed catalogue or a GitHub repository with 5 or more stars, or in use per CISA or VulnCheck; not only a CISA verdict, a forecast, or nothing at all

Products the scope rules checked

The products this CVE's record names, and whether VRT tracks each one. The scope rules decided on these.

Vendor Product Tracked CPE Source

apache camel tracked cpe:2.3:a:apache:camel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* yaml

NVD ↗ · CVE.org ↗