CamelApplication · Apache
CVE-2018-8041
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedApache Camel's Mail 2.20.0 through 2.20.3, 2.21.0 through 2.21.1 and 2.22.0 is vulnerable to path traversal.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · moderate confidenceApache Camel's Mail component versions 2.20.0-2.20.3, 2.21.0-2.21.1, and 2.22.0 contains a path traversal vulnerability, allowing attackers to access files outside the intended directory through manipulated file paths in mail operations.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data
CamelApplication
>= 2.20.0, <= 2.20.3>= 2.21.0, <= 2.21.1= 2.22.0CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify Apache Camel versionLocate the Camel version in your project's pom.xml, dependency management, or build configuration. If running Camel in a container or application server, check the camel-core or relevant Camel JAR manifest files.Affected if The installed version falls within 2.20.0-2.20.3, 2.21.0-2.21.1, or 2.22.0.
-
Verify Mail component is presentCheck your project's dependencies for camel-mail (or org.apache.camel:camel-mail). Inspect your Camel route definitions for references to 'mail' in endpoint URIs.Affected if The camel-mail component is included in your dependencies and used in active routes.
-
Confirm mail operations handle attachmentsReview your Camel mail endpoint configurations for parameters related to attachments, such as attachmentFilename, mail attachments, or file-based content in email operations.Affected if Your mail endpoints process or handle file attachments from external or user-supplied sources.
-
Inspect path handling in mail endpointsExamine how file paths are constructed or passed to mail endpoints in your route logic. Look for dynamic path construction that could include user input or external data.Affected if File paths passed to mail operations are derived from untrusted or dynamic input without validation.
You are affected if you run a vulnerable Apache Camel version (2.20.0-2.20.3, 2.21.0-2.21.1, or 2.22.0) and use the Mail component to handle file attachments with dynamic or unvalidated paths.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataUpgrade to Apache Camel version 2.20.4, 2.21.2, 2.23.0 or later. Alternatively, implement strict input validation on file path parameters in mail endpoints to reject path traversal sequences (../, etc.).
Fix this in Camel
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,752.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-8041 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2018-8041 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data