Skip to content

CVE-2026-33454

Deserialization of Untrusted Data: Is CVE-2026-33454 real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.

signals

public sources

Exploited in wild
Not listed
CISA KEV
Public exploit
PoC (unverified)
Metasploit/EDB/PoC
Base severity
9.4 Critical
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
0.6%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
CWE-502 · Deserialization of Untrusted Data
CWE

High CVSS base score, but low real-world exploitation probability (EPSS). Likely less urgent than the score implies.

public exploits

links to sources — we don’t host code

Unverified proof-of-concept code has been published. It may or may not be functional — assess before relying on it.

baseline read

auto · not a community verdict

Real, but low real-world risk

A genuine vulnerability on paper, but EPSS shows little real-world exploitation — the base score may overstate urgency. This is not the same as a false positive.

Based on CVSS · FIRST EPSS

Confirm or dispute →
Affected:Apache

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:L

The Camel-Mail component is vulnerable to Camel message header injection. The custom header filter strategy used by the component (MailHeaderFilterStrategy) only filters the 'out' direction via setOutFilterStartsWith, while it does not configure the 'in' direction via setInFilterStartsWith. As a result, when a Camel application consumes mail through camel-mail (for example via from(\"imap://...\") or from(\"pop3://...\")) the inbound filter check is skipped and Camel-prefixed MIME headers are mapped unfiltered into the Exchange. An attacker who can deliver an email to a mailbox monitored by such a consumer can inject Camel-specific headers that, for some Camel components downstream of the mail consumer (such as camel-bean, camel-exec, or camel-sql), can alter the behaviour of the route. This is the same pattern that was previously addressed in camel-undertow (CVE-2025-30177) and the broader incoming-header filter (CVE-2025-27636 and CVE-2025-29891). This issue affects Apache Camel: from 3.0.0 before 4.14.6, from 4.15.0 before 4.18.1. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 4.19.0, which fixes the issue. If users are on the 4.18.x LTS releases stream, then they are suggested to upgrade to 4.18.1. If users are on the 4.14.x LTS releases stream, then they are suggested to upgrade to 4.14.6.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-33454
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-33454/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-33454)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-33454"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-33454/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-33454"></a>

Live badge that updates automatically as the community verdict changes.

Community ground truth

Be the first practitioner to weigh in

So far this is only TruePositive's editorial baseline from public sources. Add your real-world verdict below — it becomes the signal the next person triaging this relies on.

🥇 The first 50 practitioners to contribute earn a Founding Contributor badge.

In your experience, is this finding real and exploitable?

awaiting field verdicts
Real, but not a risk here
Not a real issue

No account needed. Anonymous verdicts post as an unverified signal. Log in to make yours verified and earn reputation.

Field notes & remediation

Verdicts are the quick signal. Notes are the evidence and fixes behind them.

No notes yet. Be the first to share what you saw, or a fix that worked.

    Add a field note or remediationoptional
    Note type

    What are you adding?

    Markdown supported · minimum 20 characters.

    Same weakness: CWE-502 · Deserialization of Untrusted Data.