The vulnerability CVE-2026-71569 could compromise system integrity but typically requires user interaction to be exploited.
Status: Awaiting Analysis
Published on: 29 Oct 2026, 11:17 UTC
CVSS Release: version 3
security@apache.org
Secondary
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
CVE-2026-71569: 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.
The exploitability of CVE-2026-71569 depends on two key factors: attack complexity (the level of effort required to execute an exploit) and privileges required (the access level an attacker needs).
CVE-2026-71569 presents a challenge to exploit due to its high attack complexity, but the absence of privilege requirements still makes it a viable target for skilled attackers. A thorough security review is advised.
A lower complexity and fewer privilege requirements make exploitation easier. Security teams should evaluate these aspects to determine the urgency of mitigation strategies, such as patch management and access control policies.
Attack Complexity (AC) measures the difficulty in executing an exploit. A high AC means that specific conditions must be met, making an attack more challenging, while a low AC means the vulnerability can be exploited with minimal effort.
Privileges Required (PR) determine the level of system access necessary for an attack. Vulnerabilities requiring no privileges are more accessible to attackers, whereas high privilege requirements limit exploitation to authorized users with elevated access.
Above is the CVSS Sub-score Breakdown for CVE-2026-71569, illustrating how Base, Impact, and Exploitability factors combine to form the overall severity rating. A higher sub-score typically indicates a more severe or easier-to-exploit vulnerability.
Below is the Impact Analysis for CVE-2026-71569, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.
Stay updated with real-time CVE vulnerabilities and take action to secure your systems. Enhance your cybersecurity posture with the latest threat intelligence and mitigation techniques. Develop the skills necessary to defend against CVEs and secure critical infrastructures. Join the top cybersecurity professionals safeguarding today's infrastructures.