CVE-2026-40047: Apache Camel-Docling: Insufficient validation of custom CLI arguments enables argument injection and path traversal in DoclingProducer

Should you act?

Critical and remotely reachable

No known exploitation yet, but it is network-reachable without credentials. This signal is computed from CISA KEV, EPSS and CVSS data; it is not an editorial verdict.

• No confirmed exploitation. It is not in CISA’s KEV catalog and CISA’s SSVC assessment records no known exploitation. That can change quickly after a public write-up; re-check if you are affected.
• EPSS 2.4%, percentile 84: FIRST’s model estimates a 2.4% chance of exploitation activity in the next 30 days, higher than 84% of all scored CVEs (elevated). EPSS is a probability, not a verdict.
• Remotely reachable with no login and no user interaction. If the vulnerable service is exposed to the internet, prioritize it.
• Only applies if your dependency tree includes org.apache.camel:camel-docling (Maven) >= 4.15.0, < 4.18.3, fixed in 4.18.3. Check your lockfile, including transitive dependencies.

What it is

Improper Neutralization of Argument Delimiters in a Command ('Argument Injection') vulnerability in Apache Camel Docling component. The camel-docling component invokes the external docling command-line tool by assembling an argument list in DoclingProducer and executing it through java.lang.ProcessBuilder. Custom CLI arguments supplied through the CamelDoclingCustomArguments exchange header (a List ) were appended to that argument list with insufficient validation: the original implementation relied on a denylist of disallowed flags and only rejected path values that contained a literal ../ sequence. As a result, a Camel route that forwards externally-influenced data into the CamelDoclingCustomArguments header (or into the path-bearing headers used to build the invocation) could cause the producer to pass unrecognized or unintended docling CLI flags to the subprocess, and could supply path-like argument values that resolved outside the intended directory through traversal sequences not caught by the literal ../ check. Because Camel itself builds the docling invocation from these values, the component is responsible for constraining them, and the weak validation allowed CLI-argument injection and directory traversal in the arguments passed to the external tool. The invocation uses the list-based form of ProcessBuilder, so a shell does not interpret the argument values; OS command injection through shell metacharacters was not possible, and the metacharacter rejection added by the fix is defense-in-depth. This issue affects Apache Camel: from 4.15.0 before 4.18.3. Users are recommended to upgrade to a release that contains the CAMEL-23212 fix. On the mainline the fix is included from Apache Camel 4.19.0 (and later releases such as 4.20.0). For users on the 4.18.x LTS releases stream, upgrade to 4.18.3. The fix replaces the denylist with a strict allowlist of recognized docling CLI flags (rejecting any unrecognized flag, and rejecting producer-managed flags such as the output-directory flags), defensively rejects shell metacharacters in argument values, and normalizes path-like values with Path.normalize() before validating them so that traversal sequences which bypass a literal ../ check are detected. As defence in depth, route authors should avoid mapping untrusted message content into the CamelDoclingCustomArguments header and…

From the GitHub advisory

Improper Neutralization of Argument Delimiters in a Command ('Argument Injection') vulnerability in Apache Camel Docling component.

The camel-docling component invokes the external docling command-line tool by assembling an argument list in DoclingProducer and executing it through java.lang.ProcessBuilder. Custom CLI arguments supplied through the CamelDoclingCustomArguments exchange header (a List ) were appended to that argument list with insufficient validation: the original implementation relied on a denylist of disallowed flags and only rejected path values that contained a literal ../ sequence. As a result, a Camel route that forwards externally-influenced data into the CamelDoclingCustomArguments header (or into the path-bearing headers used to build the invocation) could cause the producer to pass unrecognized or unintended docling CLI flags to the subprocess, and could supply path-like argument values that resolved outside the intended directory through traversal sequences not caught by the literal ../ check. Because Camel itself builds the docling invocation from these values, the component is responsible for constraining them, and the weak validation allowed CLI-argument injection and directory traversal in the arguments passed to the external tool. The invocation uses the list-based form of ProcessBuilder, so a shell does not interpret the argument values; OS command injection through shell metacharacters was not possible, and the metacharacter rejection added by the fix is defense-in-depth. This issue affects Apache Camel: from 4.15.0 before 4.18.3.

Users are recommended to upgrade to a release that contains the CAMEL-23212 fix. On the mainline the fix is included from Apache Camel 4.19.0 (and later releases such as 4.20.0). For users on the 4.18.x LTS releases stream, upgrade to 4.18.3. The fix replaces the denylist with a strict allowlist of recognized docling CLI flags (rejecting any unrecognized flag, and rejecting producer-managed flags such as the output-directory flags), defensively rejects shell metacharacters in argument values, and normalizes path-like values with Path.normalize() before validating them so that traversal sequences which bypass a literal ../ check are detected. As defence in depth, route authors should avoid mapping untrusted message content into the CamelDoclingCustomArguments header and…

Weakness type: CWE-88.

Product: org.apache.camel:camel-docling (Maven) · Assigned by: apache · Published: 2026-07-06

Affected and fixed versions

Severity scores

• Attack vector: network (remotely reachable)
• Attack complexity: low
• Privileges required: none (no login)
• User interaction: none
• Scope: unchanged

CVSS measures how bad a flaw is if exploited, not how likely exploitation is. Read it next to the exploitation data below.

Exploitation and urgency

• CISA KEV: not listed (no confirmed in-the-wild exploitation known to CISA).
• CISA SSVC assessment: exploitation none, automatable no, technical impact total.
• FIRST EPSS (model of 2026-10-21): 2.43% probability of exploitation activity in the next 30 days; percentile 84.

Timeline

• 2026-07-06 — CVE record last updated
• 2026-07-06 — CVE record published by apache
• 2026-07-06 — GitHub-reviewed advisory GHSA-rpv3-6645-2vqc published (critical)

Sources and references

Original sources first. Version and fix details should always be confirmed against the vendor or project advisory.

Vendor and project advisories, patches

1. camel.apache.org camel.apache.org

Vulnerability records

1. GitHub Advisory GHSA-rpv3-6645-2vqc github.com
2. CVE.org record CVE-2026-40047 cve.org
3. NVD entry CVE-2026-40047 nvd.nist.gov

Other references from the CVE record and advisory

1. openwall.com openwall.com
2. github.com github.com
3. github.com github.com
4. github.com github.com
5. github.com github.com
6. github.com github.com
7. github.com github.com
8. issues.apache.org issues.apache.org

Critical Maven advisories · Today’s Security Digest