CVE-2020-11972
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 RabbitMQ enables Java deserialization by default. Apache Camel 2.22.x, 2.23.x, 2.24.x, 2.25.0, 3.0.0 up to 3.1.0 are affected. 2.x users should upgrade to 2.25.1, 3.x users should upgrade to 3.2.0.
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 · high confidenceThe Apache Camel RabbitMQ component enables Java deserialization by default, allowing remote code execution if a malicious message is deserialized. This stems from the component accepting serialized Java objects from RabbitMQ messages without proper validation, a well-known deserialization attack vector.
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>= 2.22.0, <= 2.25.0>= 3.0.0, <= 3.1.0>= 8.0.0, <= 8.2.2= 13.3.0.0= 13.4.0.0= 12.0.0= 12.1.0CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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 installation and versionLocate the Camel library JAR files in your application or check your dependency management system (Maven pom.xml, Gradle build.gradle) for the org.apache.camel:camel-rabbitmq dependency and its version.Affected if The installed Camel version falls within 2.22.0 to 2.25.0 or 3.0.0 to 3.1.0.
-
Confirm RabbitMQ component is in useSearch your codebase for rabbitmq endpoint URIs (typically starting with 'rabbitmq:') in route definitions or configuration files, or check if the camel-rabbitmq dependency is present in your classpath.Affected if The rabbitmq component is included in your Camel routes.
-
Check RabbitMQ endpoint Java deserialization configurationInspect your Camel route configuration files or Java code for RabbitMQ endpoint definitions. Look for the 'type' parameter or serialization-related settings in the rabbitmq: URI. Common patterns include 'type=SomeJavaClass' or unmarshaller configurations.Affected if A Java type or unmarshaller is specified that enables deserialization of Java objects from RabbitMQ messages.
-
Review Camel context XML or Java DSL for unmarshaller settingsExamine your Camel context configuration (XML files like camel-context.xml or route builder Java classes) for DataFormat definitions used with RabbitMQ endpoints, particularly ObjectFormat or Java serialization unmarshallers.Affected if An ObjectFormat or Java serialization-based data format is configured for processing incoming RabbitMQ messages.
Your environment is affected if you are running Apache Camel with the RabbitMQ component enabled and your Camel version is within 2.22.0-2.25.0 or 3.0.0-3.1.0, and you have RabbitMQ endpoints configured to deserialize Java objects.
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.
dbcve · scopedUpgrade Apache Camel to version 2.25.1 (for 2.x users) or 3.2.0 (for 3.x users) to obtain the patched RabbitMQ component. If immediate upgrade is not possible, disable Java deserialization in the RabbitMQ endpoint configuration.
Apache Camel 2.x → 2.25.1; Apache Camel 3.x → 3.2.0
- 1. Identify all deployed instances of Apache Camel RabbitMQ component in your environment
- 2. Determine the current Camel version in use (check pom.xml, dependency management, or runtime version)
- 3. For Camel 2.x versions (2.22.0 through 2.25.0): upgrade the camel-rabbitmq component to version 2.25.1 or later
- 4. For Camel 3.x versions (3.0.0 through 3.1.0): upgrade the camel-rabbitmq component to version 3.2.0 or later
- 5. Update Maven/Gradle dependencies to use the fixed version numbers
- 6. Rebuild and redeploy all affected applications
- 7. Verify the upgrade by testing RabbitMQ message flows
- 8. Scan the updated deployment to confirm the fix is applied
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,472.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-11972 — 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-2020-11972 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