CVE-2026-71569

MEDIUMPre-NVD 4.84.8
EchelonGraph scoreHIGH confidence

“—” beside the score: it is equal to the CVSS score beside it.

Score 4.8 from GitHub Security Advisory published 2026-10-29. A secondary CVSS source baseline 4.8; sources differ by 0.0.

Triggered by: GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
Sources: GitHub Security Advisory, a secondary CVSS source
Trending — 5 sources updated this week

Also known asEUVD-2026-112721 (ENISA EUVD) · GHSA-w3r7-vr6p-3qqr (GitHub Security Advisories)Source: ENISA EUVD

4.8EG
EchelonGraph verdictMonitorRemediate within your standard update timelines (the SSVC decision on this page).
  • Lower severity and no public exploit yet
CISA-KEV: Not listedEPSS PROB: 0.3%CVSS: 4.8Exploit: None knownExposed services: Not assessed

Users on the 4.22.x stream should upgrade to 4.22.2 (from the CVE record's solution, Apache Software Foundation) — apply it.

Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in Apache Camel A2A component.

This issue affects Apache Camel: from 4.21.0 before 4.22.2.

WebhookUrlValidator classified a push notification webhook host in two places that did not agree. A host written as an IP literal was matched against a list of string prefixes that named the IPv6 unique local range fc00::/7, while a host reached through a name was resolved and the resulting address classified with the InetAddress predicates isLoopbackAddress, isAnyLocalAddress, isLinkLocalAddress and isSiteLocalAddress. Those predicates do not cover the same ground as the prefix list: isSiteLocalAddress reports the deprecated fec0::/10 block and not the fc00::/7 unique local addresses that replaced it, and the JDK carries no predicate for them at all. The same address was therefore accepted or rejected depending on how it was written, and a webhook URL whose host name resolved into fc00::/7 passed a guard that refused the identical address given as a literal. PushNotificationDispatcher then sent the push notification to that address, together with any Authorization header carried in the same configuration, whose scheme and credentials the registering caller supplies. The webhook URL arrives as TaskPushNotificationConfig.url from the caller registering the push notification, so it is attacker-controlled, and allowLocalWebhookUrls is false by default, which is the configuration in which the guard is expected to hold. The response is not relayed back to the caller who registered the configuration, so what the gap yields is a blind outbound HTTPS request from the Camel process to an internal address the guard was written to refuse; reaching a service that way additionally requires that the name resolve into fc00::/7 in the target environment, that an HTTPS service be listening on that address, and that the TLS handshake succeed for the name being requested, which is why the severity is assessed medium. The same string pre-check was also wrong in the other direction: it matched the raw host string without first establishing that the host was an IP literal, so any name merely beginning with fc or fd, such as fcm.googleapis.com, was refused outright.

Users are recommended to upgrade to version 4.23.0, which fixes the issue. If users are on the 4.22.x releases stream, then they are suggested to upgrade to 4.22.2. The 4.21.x release line reached end of life before this issue was resolved and will not receive a fix, so deployments on it must move to a supported release. Both the literal and the resolved path now classify the address from its raw bytes with one shared classifier, which recognises fc00::/7 and the shared address space 100.64.0.0/10, as well as IPv4-compatible, NAT64 (64:ff9b::/96) and 6to4 (2002::/16) addresses whose embedded IPv4 address is not globally routable. For deployments that cannot upgrade immediately, place authentication in front of the A2A push notification configuration path so that the webhook URL does not arrive from an untrusted caller, and deny egress from the Camel process to fc00::/7 at the network level; where the deployment has no need of IPv6, starting the JVM with -Djava.net.preferIPv4Stack=true removes the address class the gap turns on. Note that allowLocalWebhookUrls=false is already the default and does not by itself close the gap.

CVSS v3
4.8
EG Score
4.8MEDIUMhigh confidence
EG Risk
22
EG Risk 22/100

EG Risk is EchelonGraph's 0–100 priority score. It fuses impact severity (EG Severity, the CVSS base score, never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score) with real-world exploitation and automatability, under weights EchelonGraph set by hand, so you can rank equal-severity CVEs and fix the most dangerous first. Higher = act sooner.

How it’s computed (value × EchelonGraph’s weight)
Severity48% × 45%
Impact severity (EG Severity): CVSS 4.8 of 10. Never the KEV-floored or EPSS-lifted EG Score.
Exploitation0% × 40%
No KEV listing, EG-KEV tier or EPSS when EchelonGraph scored this CVE.
Automatability0% × 15%
CISA's SSVC Automatable value: no (Vulnrichment).
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph): Track at every mission impact level.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE.
Action: Users on the 4.22.x stream should upgrade to 4.22.2 (from the CVE record's solution, Apache Software Foundation). Apply it within your standard update timelines.
EPSS PROB
0.3%
EPSS %ILE
28th
KEV
Not listed

What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)

The EG score (4.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 4.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.

EG Severity
4.8 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
EG Likelihood
0.3% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS. FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
Confirmed exploitation
None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
EG Priority
SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at every mission impact level.CISA BOD 26-04: 60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.

SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at every mission impact level.

Users on the 4.22.x stream should upgrade to 4.22.2 (from the CVE record's solution, Apache Software Foundation). Apply it within your standard update timelines.

Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table

BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.

In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it

Published

October 29, 2026

Last Modified

October 29, 2026

Advisory Details (4)

Auto-updated Oct 29, 2026
Fix named in the CVE record's solution (Apache Software Foundation). Sources: github_pr.
GitHub pull request

CAMEL-24371: camel-a2a - fix WebhookUrlValidator address classification and host matching

Fix merged in apache/camel PR #26583 on 2026-09-18 — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/apache/camel/pull/26583
GitHub pull request

CAMEL-24371: camel-a2a - fix WebhookUrlValidator address classification and host matching

Fix merged in apache/camel PR #25406 on 2026-08-09 — awaiting tagged release

https://github.com/apache/camel/pull/25406
Web page

Apache Camel Security Advisory - CVE-2026-71569 - Apache Camel

https://camel.apache.org/security/CVE-2026-71569.html

Vendor Advisories for CVE-2026-71569(1)

These vendors published their own advisory mentioning this CVE — often with vendor-specific remediation steps + affected product lists not in NVD.

Weakness Classification(1)

MITRE Common Weakness Enumeration — the root-cause categories this CVE belongs to.

Data Freshness Timeline

(refreshed 9× in last 7d / 9× in last 30d)

Each row is a time one of our pipelines fetched, updated or re-scored this CVE. For example, "NVD update" means NVD published or revised its analysis for this CVE; "MITRE cvelistV5" means we ingested or refreshed it from the CNA feed. An arrow marks a change the record states ("CVSS v3 → 9.1"); EPSS and GHSA rows show the values recorded at that time, not what changed (EPSS values are rounded; hover one for the exact figures). Most recent first.

  1. 2026-10-30 16:35 UTCEPSS rescoreEPSS 0.3% · 28th percentile
  2. 2026-10-29 14:27 UTCEG score recompute
  3. 2026-10-29 14:27 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-w3r7-vr6p-3qqr · GitHub CVSS 4.8
  4. 2026-10-29 13:24 UTCEG score recompute
  5. 2026-10-29 13:24 UTCGHSA enrichmentGHSA-w3r7-vr6p-3qqr · GitHub CVSS 4.8
  6. 2026-10-29 11:26 UTCEG score recompute
  7. 2026-10-29 11:02 UTCENISA EUVD ID recordedEUVD-2026-112721 · Source: ENISA EUVD
  8. 2026-10-29 10:45 UTCEG score recomputeFirst assessed: 4.8 MEDIUM
  9. 2026-10-29 10:43 UTCMITRE cvelistV5first tracked

Frequently asked(5)

What is CVE-2026-71569?
CVE-2026-71569 is a medium-severity vulnerability; its CVE record was published on October 29, 2026. Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) vulnerability in Apache Camel A2A component. This issue affects Apache Camel: from 4.21.0 before 4.22.2. WebhookUrlValidator classified a push notification webhook host in two places that did not agree. A host written as an IP literal was matched against a list of…
When was the CVE record for CVE-2026-71569 published?
The CVE record for CVE-2026-71569 was published on October 29, 2026. That is the record's publication date; the vulnerability itself may have been made public earlier. EchelonGraph's copy of the record carries a last-modified date of October 29, 2026; the record at its source may have been updated since.
Is CVE-2026-71569 actively exploited?
CVE-2026-71569 is not currently on CISA's Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog. FIRST EPSS estimates a 0.3% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days (28th percentile of EPSS-scored CVEs).
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-71569?
CVE-2026-71569 has a CVSS base score of 4.8 (a secondary CVSS source that NVD displays; NVD's own analysis pending).
How do I remediate CVE-2026-71569?
The CVE record's solution for CVE-2026-71569, written by its CNA Apache Software Foundation, names the fix: "Users on the 4.22.x stream should upgrade to 4.22.2." The vendor advisories EchelonGraph has for CVE-2026-71569 are linked in the Vendor Advisories panel on this page.

Dependency Blast Radius

Explore the affected products and dependency analysis for CVE-2026-71569

Explore →

Is Your Infrastructure Affected by CVE-2026-71569?

EchelonGraph automatically scans your cloud infrastructure and maps CVE exposure using blast radius analysis.