FKIE_CVE-2026-42526

Vulnerability from fkie_nvd - Published: 2026-05-19 20:16 - Updated: 2026-06-30 16:17
Severity
5.3 (Medium) - CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
Summary
In the AWS Secrets Manager and SSM Parameter Store secrets backends of `apache-airflow-providers-amazon` prior to 9.28.0, the team-scoping logic could resolve a `conn_id` containing a `/` (e.g. `"my_team/conn"`) to the same path as another team's team-scoped secret when the caller had no team context. A privileged caller without team context could therefore retrieve another team's secret by crafting a colliding `conn_id`. Fixed in 9.28.0 by switching the team-scope separator to `--` and rejecting team-shaped `conn_id`s when team context is absent. Affects the experimental multi-tenant teams feature only. Users are recommended to upgrade to `apache-airflow-providers-amazon` 9.28.0, which fixes the issue.
References
security@apache.orghttps://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/65703Issue Tracking, Patch
security@apache.orghttps://lists.apache.org/thread/0092sz5g520d3qqjb01wd61myqlgjtynMailing List, Vendor Advisory
af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2026/05/19/36Mailing List, Third Party Advisory
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
apache airflow_providers_amazon *
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "affectedData": [
        {
          "collectionURL": "https://pypi.python.org",
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
          "packageName": "apache-airflow-providers-amazon",
          "product": "Apache Airflow Amazon provider",
          "vendor": "Apache Software Foundation",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThan": "9.28.0",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "0",
              "versionType": "semver"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "source": "security@apache.org"
    }
  ],
  "configurations": [
    {
      "nodes": [
        {
          "cpeMatch": [
            {
              "criteria": "cpe:2.3:a:apache:airflow_providers_amazon:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
              "matchCriteriaId": "8214FF29-E8CC-412B-B3C2-BF9975578CE8",
              "versionEndExcluding": "9.28.0",
              "vulnerable": true
            }
          ],
          "negate": false,
          "operator": "OR"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "cveTags": [],
  "descriptions": [
    {
      "lang": "en",
      "value": "In the AWS Secrets Manager and SSM Parameter Store secrets backends of `apache-airflow-providers-amazon` prior to 9.28.0, the team-scoping logic could resolve a `conn_id` containing a `/` (e.g. `\"my_team/conn\"`) to the same path as another team\u0027s team-scoped secret when the caller had no team context. A privileged caller without team context could therefore retrieve another team\u0027s secret by crafting a colliding `conn_id`. Fixed in 9.28.0 by switching the team-scope separator to `--` and rejecting team-shaped `conn_id`s when team context is absent. Affects the experimental multi-tenant teams feature only. Users are recommended to upgrade to `apache-airflow-providers-amazon` 9.28.0, which fixes the issue."
    }
  ],
  "id": "CVE-2026-42526",
  "lastModified": "2026-06-30T16:17:40.277",
  "metrics": {
    "cvssMetricV31": [
      {
        "cvssData": {
          "attackComplexity": "HIGH",
          "attackVector": "NETWORK",
          "availabilityImpact": "NONE",
          "baseScore": 5.3,
          "baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
          "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
          "integrityImpact": "NONE",
          "privilegesRequired": "LOW",
          "scope": "UNCHANGED",
          "userInteraction": "NONE",
          "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
          "version": "3.1"
        },
        "exploitabilityScore": 1.6,
        "impactScore": 3.6,
        "source": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
        "type": "Secondary"
      }
    ],
    "ssvcV203": [
      {
        "source": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
        "ssvcData": {
          "id": "CVE-2026-42526",
          "options": [
            {
              "exploitation": "none"
            },
            {
              "automatable": "no"
            },
            {
              "technicalImpact": "partial"
            }
          ],
          "role": "CISA Coordinator",
          "timestamp": "2026-05-19T19:53:21.498429Z",
          "version": "2.0.3"
        }
      }
    ]
  },
  "published": "2026-05-19T20:16:19.163",
  "references": [
    {
      "source": "security@apache.org",
      "tags": [
        "Issue Tracking",
        "Patch"
      ],
      "url": "https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/65703"
    },
    {
      "source": "security@apache.org",
      "tags": [
        "Mailing List",
        "Vendor Advisory"
      ],
      "url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread/0092sz5g520d3qqjb01wd61myqlgjtyn"
    },
    {
      "source": "af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108",
      "tags": [
        "Mailing List",
        "Third Party Advisory"
      ],
      "url": "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2026/05/19/36"
    }
  ],
  "sourceIdentifier": "security@apache.org",
  "vulnStatus": "Analyzed",
  "weaknesses": [
    {
      "description": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "CWE-863"
        }
      ],
      "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.