Red Hat Build Of Apache Camel Hawtio 4
Monthly
Denial-of-service in Undertow's WebSocket permessage-deflate implementation allows unauthenticated remote attackers to exhaust server memory by sending specially crafted compressed WebSocket messages. The root cause is exponential buffer doubling in the PerMessageDeflateFunction.largerBuffer() method (CWE-770), which triggers unbounded memory allocation with no confirmation of active exploitation at time of analysis. Affected deployments span a broad Red Hat ecosystem including JBoss EAP 7/8, Red Hat Data Grid 8, Apache Camel for Spring Boot 4, and RHEL 8/9/10 packages that bundle Undertow.
HTTP request smuggling in Undertow's ChunkReader component enables unauthenticated remote attackers to inject out-of-sync requests, bypassing upstream security controls such as authentication layers or reverse-proxy ACLs. Affected deployments include JBoss EAP 7, WildFly, Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8/9/10, Red Hat Data Grid 8, Red Hat Fuse 7, Red Hat Single Sign-On 7, and several Apache Camel-based Red Hat products. No confirmed active exploitation or public proof-of-concept has been identified at time of analysis; the CVSS 5.3 Medium score reflects limited direct impact, though real-world risk in proxy-fronted architectures is meaningfully higher than the score alone suggests.
HTTP request smuggling in Undertow (the embedded web server underpinning JBoss EAP, Red Hat Data Grid, and Apache Camel for Spring Boot) allows remote unauthenticated attackers to bypass front-end security controls by prepending whitespace to header lines. Undertow strips leading spaces from the first header line in violation of RFC 7230, creating a parser discrepancy between upstream proxies and the application server. No public exploit identified at time of analysis, and EPSS sits at 0.13% (32nd percentile), but the CVSS 9.1 and broad Red Hat middleware exposure make this a high-value target for chained attacks.
HTTP request smuggling in Undertow allows remote unauthenticated attackers to send `\r\r\r` as a header block terminator, which can desynchronize parsing when Undertow sits behind specific intermediaries such as older Apache Traffic Server or Google Cloud Classic Application Load Balancer. The flaw affects numerous Red Hat distributions of Undertow (JBoss EAP 7/8, Data Grid 8, Fuse 7, Camel for Spring Boot 4, RHEL 8/9/10) and carries a CVSS 9.1, though EPSS is only 0.04% and there is no public exploit identified at time of analysis.
HTTP request smuggling in Red Hat Undertow allows remote unauthenticated attackers to bypass front-end security controls by exploiting parsing discrepancies between Undertow and upstream proxies when handling crafted header names. The flaw (CWE-444) affects Undertow embedded in multiple Red Hat products including JBoss EAP 7/8, Data Grid 8, Fuse 7, and Apache Camel for Spring Boot 4, with Red Hat issuing patches via RHSA-2026:25125 and RHSA-2026:25126. There is no public exploit identified at time of analysis and EPSS is low (0.10%), but CVSS 9.1 and SSVC 'total' technical impact warrant prompt patching of internet-facing deployments.
Denial-of-service in Undertow's WebSocket permessage-deflate implementation allows unauthenticated remote attackers to exhaust server memory by sending specially crafted compressed WebSocket messages. The root cause is exponential buffer doubling in the PerMessageDeflateFunction.largerBuffer() method (CWE-770), which triggers unbounded memory allocation with no confirmation of active exploitation at time of analysis. Affected deployments span a broad Red Hat ecosystem including JBoss EAP 7/8, Red Hat Data Grid 8, Apache Camel for Spring Boot 4, and RHEL 8/9/10 packages that bundle Undertow.
HTTP request smuggling in Undertow's ChunkReader component enables unauthenticated remote attackers to inject out-of-sync requests, bypassing upstream security controls such as authentication layers or reverse-proxy ACLs. Affected deployments include JBoss EAP 7, WildFly, Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8/9/10, Red Hat Data Grid 8, Red Hat Fuse 7, Red Hat Single Sign-On 7, and several Apache Camel-based Red Hat products. No confirmed active exploitation or public proof-of-concept has been identified at time of analysis; the CVSS 5.3 Medium score reflects limited direct impact, though real-world risk in proxy-fronted architectures is meaningfully higher than the score alone suggests.
HTTP request smuggling in Undertow (the embedded web server underpinning JBoss EAP, Red Hat Data Grid, and Apache Camel for Spring Boot) allows remote unauthenticated attackers to bypass front-end security controls by prepending whitespace to header lines. Undertow strips leading spaces from the first header line in violation of RFC 7230, creating a parser discrepancy between upstream proxies and the application server. No public exploit identified at time of analysis, and EPSS sits at 0.13% (32nd percentile), but the CVSS 9.1 and broad Red Hat middleware exposure make this a high-value target for chained attacks.
HTTP request smuggling in Undertow allows remote unauthenticated attackers to send `\r\r\r` as a header block terminator, which can desynchronize parsing when Undertow sits behind specific intermediaries such as older Apache Traffic Server or Google Cloud Classic Application Load Balancer. The flaw affects numerous Red Hat distributions of Undertow (JBoss EAP 7/8, Data Grid 8, Fuse 7, Camel for Spring Boot 4, RHEL 8/9/10) and carries a CVSS 9.1, though EPSS is only 0.04% and there is no public exploit identified at time of analysis.
HTTP request smuggling in Red Hat Undertow allows remote unauthenticated attackers to bypass front-end security controls by exploiting parsing discrepancies between Undertow and upstream proxies when handling crafted header names. The flaw (CWE-444) affects Undertow embedded in multiple Red Hat products including JBoss EAP 7/8, Data Grid 8, Fuse 7, and Apache Camel for Spring Boot 4, with Red Hat issuing patches via RHSA-2026:25125 and RHSA-2026:25126. There is no public exploit identified at time of analysis and EPSS is low (0.10%), but CVSS 9.1 and SSVC 'total' technical impact warrant prompt patching of internet-facing deployments.