GCVE Workshop - 22 September 2026 (14:00-18:00), Luxembourg Before The Vulnopticon Conference - Registration

FKIE_CVE-2026-68971

Vulnerability from fkie_nvd - Published: 2026-08-12 16:17 - Updated: 2026-08-13 14:14
Severity
6.5 (Medium) - CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
Summary
Apache Airflow's asset materialization endpoint (`POST /api/v2/assets/{asset_id}/materialize`) and the XCom result check on `wait_dag_run_until_finished` authorized the target Dag without its team, unlike every other authorization site. A team-aware auth manager distinguishes a team-scoped Dag from a global one by that field -- the Keycloak auth manager, for example, checks the `DAG` resource instead of `DAG:<team>` -- so the team-scoped permission that should gate the request was never consulted. In a deployment running multi-team mode with a team-aware auth manager, an authenticated user in one team could trigger Dag runs belonging to another team, supplying their own `dag_run_id` and `conf`, and could read another team's XCom values. Deployments using the FAB auth manager are unaffected, as it has no multi-team support. Users are advised to upgrade to apache-airflow 3.3.1 or later, which resolves the Dag's team at both sites.
References
security@apache.orghttps://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/70893Issue Tracking, Patch
security@apache.orghttps://lists.apache.org/thread/kfxqqwgojdjdnt6bxg3ord4y41y334foMailing List
af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2026/08/12/15Mailing List
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
apache airflow *
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "affectedData": [
        {
          "collectionURL": "https://pypi.python.org",
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
          "packageName": "apache-airflow",
          "product": "Apache Airflow",
          "vendor": "Apache Software Foundation",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThan": "3.3.1",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "source": "security@apache.org"
    }
  ],
  "configurations": [
    {
      "nodes": [
        {
          "cpeMatch": [
            {
              "criteria": "cpe:2.3:a:apache:airflow:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
              "matchCriteriaId": "FDF5E090-3549-452E-BB3A-741DCE15078E",
              "versionEndExcluding": "3.3.1",
              "vulnerable": true
            }
          ],
          "negate": false,
          "operator": "OR"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "cveTags": [],
  "descriptions": [
    {
      "lang": "en",
      "value": "Apache Airflow\u0027s asset materialization endpoint (`POST /api/v2/assets/{asset_id}/materialize`) and the XCom result check on `wait_dag_run_until_finished` authorized the target Dag without its team, unlike every other authorization site. A team-aware auth manager distinguishes a team-scoped Dag from a global one by that field -- the Keycloak auth manager, for example, checks the `DAG` resource instead of `DAG:\u003cteam\u003e` -- so the team-scoped permission that should gate the request was never consulted. In a deployment running multi-team mode with a team-aware auth manager, an authenticated user in one team could trigger Dag runs belonging to another team, supplying their own `dag_run_id` and `conf`, and could read another team\u0027s XCom values. Deployments using the FAB auth manager are unaffected, as it has no multi-team support. Users are advised to upgrade to apache-airflow 3.3.1 or later, which resolves the Dag\u0027s team at both sites."
    }
  ],
  "id": "CVE-2026-68971",
  "lastModified": "2026-08-13T14:14:35.840",
  "metrics": {
    "cvssMetricV31": [
      {
        "cvssData": {
          "attackComplexity": "LOW",
          "attackVector": "NETWORK",
          "availabilityImpact": "NONE",
          "baseScore": 6.5,
          "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
          "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
          "integrityImpact": "NONE",
          "privilegesRequired": "LOW",
          "scope": "UNCHANGED",
          "userInteraction": "NONE",
          "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
          "version": "3.1"
        },
        "exploitabilityScore": 2.8,
        "impactScore": 3.6,
        "source": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
        "type": "Secondary"
      }
    ],
    "ssvcV203": [
      {
        "source": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
        "ssvcData": {
          "id": "CVE-2026-68971",
          "options": [
            {
              "exploitation": "none"
            },
            {
              "automatable": "no"
            },
            {
              "technicalImpact": "partial"
            }
          ],
          "role": "CISA Coordinator",
          "timestamp": "2026-08-13T12:04:55.035132Z",
          "version": "2.0.3"
        }
      }
    ]
  },
  "published": "2026-08-12T16:17:19.970",
  "references": [
    {
      "source": "security@apache.org",
      "tags": [
        "Issue Tracking",
        "Patch"
      ],
      "url": "https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/70893"
    },
    {
      "source": "security@apache.org",
      "tags": [
        "Mailing List"
      ],
      "url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread/kfxqqwgojdjdnt6bxg3ord4y41y334fo"
    },
    {
      "source": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
      "tags": [
        "Mailing List"
      ],
      "url": "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2026/08/12/15"
    }
  ],
  "sourceIdentifier": "security@apache.org",
  "vulnStatus": "Analyzed",
  "weaknesses": [
    {
      "description": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "CWE-862"
        }
      ],
      "source": "security@apache.org",
      "type": "Secondary"
    }
  ]
}



Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.





Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.

Sightings

Author Source Type Date Other

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.


Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.