HOL LogoGuard

Explore HOL

  • HOL home
  • AI agent registry
  • AI plugins
  • Open standards
  • HOL members

Guard product

  • Guard overviewLocal security and control for AI agents and the tools they use.
  • FeaturesRuntime protection, policy routing, review, and evidence.

Explore Guard

  • Product previewWalk through Guard surfaces in read-only demo mode.
  • ComparisonCompare Guard with native controls and AI security vendors.

AI tools

  • All AI toolsEvery supported AI tool and how Guard applies policy to it.
  • Codex
  • Claude Code
  • Cursor
  • Antigravity CLI
  • OpenCode
  • Hermes
  • OpenClaw
  • GitHub Copilot CLI
  • Antigravity
  • Kimi
  • Grok
  • Pi / Oh My Pi
  • Zcode

Extensions

  • All extensionsBrowse command and MCP coverage with owners and stated limits.
  • Command coverageShell command protection across clouds, databases, backups, and packages.
  • MCP server coverageSee how Guard maps risk state across MCP tools and servers.
  • Core safetyThe safety floor listings that ship with Guard.
  • Data and resilienceBackup and storage command protection.
  • Cloud and infrastructureAWS, Azure, GCP, Kubernetes, and more.

Security

  • AI security hubSecurity research, advisories, and agent safety coverage.
  • AI tool securitySecurity profiles for each supported coding agent.
  • Safe labsHands-on attack simulations with safe boundaries.
  • Redacted warningsReal blocked actions with sensitive details removed.
  • AdvisoriesCoordinated disclosure reports for AI tooling.
  • Active CVEsSearch active CVEs affecting AI tooling.

Learn

  • Security guidesPractical guides for securing AI agent workflows.
  • DocsInstall, configure, and operate Guard with confidence.
  • ResearchPublished security research, benchmarks, and methodology.

Community

  • ReleasesVersion history, shipped changes and upgrade notes.
  • ContributorsThe people and contributions behind HOL Guard.
  • AffiliatesShare Guard with your audience and earn from referrals.
  • SponsorKeep agent security open: sponsor a project, place a banner, or fund a security initiative.
PricingEnterpriseOpen AppInstall Guard
  1. Guard
  2. Security
  3. CVEs
  4. CVE 2026 59230 apache camel camel mail the mimemultipart data
HOL Guard

Public security guidance for teams protecting AI harnesses, MCP servers, skills, prompts, and local tool execution.

Install Guard

AI Security

  • Prompt injection
  • MCP security
  • OWASP MCP mapping
  • Supply chain

Resources

  • Trust packet
  • Harness setup
  • Redacted warnings
  • Safe labs

Product

  • Install Guard
  • Pricing
  • Open dashboard
Guard
  • Guard Overview
  • Releases
  • Contributors
  • Install Guard
  • Pricing
Docs
  • Documentation Index
  • Developer Hub
  • API Reference
  • Root OpenAPI
  • Registry OpenAPI
  • Run in Postman
  • Standards
  • Submit ERC-8004 Contract
  • Feature Your Agent
Best Plugins
  • Browse Plugins
  • Plugin Launches
  • Best Claude Plugins
  • Best Codex Plugins
  • Best Grok Plugins
  • Best Kimi Plugins
  • Best DeepSeek Plugins
  • Best Antigravity Plugins
  • Best MCP Servers
  • Best Cursor Plugins
  • Best OpenCode Plugins
Best Agents
  • Best ERC-8004 Agents
  • Best Virtuals Agents
  • Best MCP Servers
  • Best A2A Agents
  • Best x402 Payable
  • All Categories
Community
  • Telegram
  • X
More
  • About HOL
  • Contact
  • Blog
  • GitHub
  • Privacy
  • Terms of Service
Settings

Copyright © 2026 HOL DAO LLC. All rights reserved.

Back to active CVEs
Medium · CVSS 6.5CVE-2026-59230GHSA-CX47-QXP5-MMH2

Apache Camel: Camel-Mail: the MimeMultipart data format copied MIME headers onto the Camel message without a header filter strategy when unmarshalling with headersInline enabledCVE-2026-59230

Answer in brief

CVE-2026-59230 records a Medium severity (CVSS 6.5) vulnerability in Apache Camel: Camel-Mail: the MimeMultipart data format copied MIME headers onto the Camel message without a header filter strategy when unmarshalling with headersInline enabled. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps Apache Software Foundation/Apache Camel (generic), org.apache.camel:camel-mail (maven), org.apache.camel:camel-mail (maven), org.apache.camel:camel-mail (maven). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Analysis pending evidence review

HOL Guard separates source facts from reviewed analysis. See the methodology.

Published Aug 24, 2026Updated Aug 28, 2026Source checked Oct 9, 2026First seen by HOL Aug 24, 2026Material review Aug 28, 2026
Upstream Advisory

Key facts

Risk
Medium · CVSS 6.5
Exploitation
Not marked as known exploited
Affected software
5 mapped packages or products
Fix availability
Available

Why this deserves its current priority

CVSS is 6.5. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. Treat this as a source-backed prioritization signal, not a statement about your environment.

Analysis status

Analysis pending evidence review

Factual feed record only; HOL analysis is not approved for indexing. Read the methodology.

Affected scope and exposure questions

The current feed maps Apache Software Foundation/Apache Camel (generic), org.apache.camel:camel-mail (maven), org.apache.camel:camel-mail (maven), org.apache.camel:camel-mail (maven). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.

Affected products and reported versions
ProductAffected versionsFixed versions
cpe:2.3:a:apache:camel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*Not reportedNot reported
Mapped affected packages and fixed versions
PackageAffected rangeFixed version
Apache Software Foundation/Apache Camelgeneric>=2.17.0 <4.14.9 || >=4.15.0 <4.18.4 || >=4.19.0 <4.22.04.14.9, 4.18.4, 4.22.0
org.apache.camel:camel-mailmaven>=2.17.0,<4.14.94.14.9
org.apache.camel:camel-mailmaven>=4.15.0,<4.18.44.18.4
org.apache.camel:camel-mailmaven>=4.19.0,<4.22.04.22.0

Recommended response

  1. 1Check inventory. Check lockfiles and deployed manifests for Apache Software Foundation/Apache Camel, org.apache.camel:camel-mail, org.apache.camel:camel-mail.
  2. 2Review the reported fix. Update Apache Software Foundation/Apache Camel to 4.14.9; org.apache.camel:camel-mail to 4.14.9; org.apache.camel:camel-mail to 4.18.4; org.apache.camel:camel-mail to 4.22.0 if you use the affected versions. Test the change in a non-production environment first.

Evidence timeline and material changes

  1. Published upstream

    Aug 24, 2026

    Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:record
  2. Source modified

    Aug 28, 2026

    Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:record
  3. First seen by HOL

    Aug 24, 2026

Sources and claim methodology

  • Source referencecamel.apache.org
  • Source referenceopenwall.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • GitHub security advisorygithub.com
  • NVD vulnerability recordnvd.nist.gov
Upstream source description

Improper input validation vulnerability in Apache Camel. This issue affects Apache Camel: from 2.17.0 before 4.14.9, from 4.15.0 before 4.18.4, from 4.19.0 before 4.22.0. The camel-mail component ships a MimeMultipart data format that can unmarshal a MIME multipart message. When it is configured with headersInline set to true, the unmarshal path copies the MIME headers of the incoming message onto the Camel message: it enumerates every header that is not one of the three standard ones it generates itself - Message-ID, MIME-Version and Content-Type - and calls setHeader for each, applying no HeaderFilterStrategy. The names of those MIME headers come from the message being unmarshalled, so a sender able to influence the message could place a header whose name falls in the Camel-internal namespace and have it set on the Exchange. Camel components read control headers from that namespace to override their configured behaviour - the camel-sql producer, for instance, takes the statement to execute from a Camel header when one is present - so an injected header could redirect what a downstream step in the route does with data the route author never intended it to take from the message. Which sinks are reachable, and what the consequences are, depends entirely on what the route does after the unmarshal step. The camel-mail consumer already applied a header filter strategy on its own inbound path, so this was the parallel inbound path into the same component that the earlier hardening did not cover. The affected copy is reached only when headersInline is enabled, which is not the default: with the default setting the MIME headers are surfaced as attachments rather than as message headers, and are not affected. The behaviour dates back to the introduction of the data format in 2.17.0 and was present on every release line until this fix. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 4.22.0, which fixes the issue. If users are on the 4.14.x LTS releases stream, then they are suggested to upgrade to 4.14.9. If users are on the 4.18.x releases stream, then they are suggested to upgrade to 4.18.4. For deployments that cannot upgrade immediately, leave headersInline at its default of false where the inline headers are not needed, since the copy is only reached when it is enabled. Where it must stay enabled, strip Camel-internal headers immediately after the unmarshal step, for example with removeHeaders(“Camel*”) placed before any processor or producer that reads control headers, and do not unmarshal MIME content from an untrusted sender into a route that dispatches on header values. As defence in depth, treat the header names of any MIME message arriving from outside the trust boundary as untrusted input.

Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.

Related CVEs

  • Hazelcast: Arbitrary member memory access by low-privileged clientAlso CWE-20
  • SumatraPDF: SyncTeX Argument Injection in Inverse Search Enables Arbitrary Command Execution via External EditorsAlso CWE-20
  • Jivejdon through 5.0 SQL Injection via username in userListActionSame generic ecosystem
  • Unauthenticated JSON API Authorization Bypass Vulnerability in TP-Link Tapo C325WBSame generic ecosystem
  • Unauthenticated RTSP Tunnel Denial-of-Service Vulnerability in TP-Link Tapo C325WBSame generic ecosystem
  • Predictable Media Stream Pre-Shared Key Vulnerability in TP-Link Tapo C325WBSame generic ecosystem

Record context

Vulnerability class
Vulnerability
EPSS
Not reported
CWE IDs
CWE-20
Source
CVE List V5
Source checked
Oct 9, 2026
References
16 linked sources
Open source record