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

FKIE_CVE-2026-75156

Vulnerability from fkie_nvd - Published: 2026-09-08 17:18 - Updated: 2026-09-08 19:19
Severity
9.1 (Critical) - CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
Summary
Apache Airflow FAB provider versions 3.7.3 through 3.8.0 do not validate the issuer or audience of Azure AD `id_token`s during OAuth login. Deployments are affected only when the FAB auth manager is configured with Azure AD as an OAuth provider. Because the signing keys are fetched from Microsoft's **multi-tenant** JWKS endpoint, an `id_token` minted in *any* Azure tenant — including one the attacker creates — passes signature verification, and the username and role assignments are then read from that attacker-controlled token. Anyone able to register an Azure tenant can therefore authenticate to the Airflow UI with no prior access to the deployment. The fix for **CVE-2026-59243** was incomplete, and this advisory closes the remaining gap: that fix made the provider verify the `id_token` signature, but did not add issuer or audience checks. Operators who already applied the CVE-2026-59243 fix are **still affected and must upgrade again** — 3.7.3 is the release that shipped that fix, so every version containing it falls inside this affected range. Upgrade to apache-airflow-providers-fab `3.8.1` or later.
References
security@apache.orghttps://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/71735
security@apache.orghttps://lists.apache.org/thread/n3l6z4jfdxj4p0t8l7m6olkq6xsc6f76
security@apache.orghttps://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-59243
Impacted products
Vendor Product Version
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "affectedData": [
        {
          "collectionURL": "https://pypi.python.org",
          "defaultStatus": "unaffected",
          "packageName": "apache-airflow-providers-fab",
          "product": "Apache Airflow FAB provider",
          "vendor": "Apache Software Foundation",
          "versions": [
            {
              "lessThan": "3.8.1",
              "status": "affected",
              "version": "3.7.3",
              "versionType": "semver"
            }
          ]
        }
      ],
      "source": "security@apache.org"
    }
  ],
  "cveTags": [],
  "descriptions": [
    {
      "lang": "en",
      "value": "Apache Airflow FAB provider versions 3.7.3 through 3.8.0 do not validate the issuer or audience of Azure AD `id_token`s during OAuth login. Deployments are affected only when the FAB auth manager is configured with Azure AD as an OAuth provider. Because the signing keys are fetched from Microsoft\u0027s **multi-tenant** JWKS endpoint, an `id_token` minted in *any* Azure tenant \u2014 including one the attacker creates \u2014 passes signature verification, and the username and role assignments are then read from that attacker-controlled token. Anyone able to register an Azure tenant can therefore authenticate to the Airflow UI with no prior access to the deployment.\n\nThe fix for **CVE-2026-59243** was incomplete, and this advisory closes the remaining gap: that fix made the provider verify the `id_token` signature, but did not add issuer or audience checks. Operators who already applied the CVE-2026-59243 fix are **still affected and must upgrade again** \u2014 3.7.3 is the release that shipped that fix, so every version containing it falls inside this affected range. Upgrade to apache-airflow-providers-fab `3.8.1` or later."
    }
  ],
  "id": "CVE-2026-75156",
  "lastModified": "2026-09-08T19:19:40.427",
  "metrics": {
    "cvssMetricV31": [
      {
        "cvssData": {
          "attackComplexity": "LOW",
          "attackVector": "NETWORK",
          "availabilityImpact": "NONE",
          "baseScore": 9.1,
          "baseSeverity": "CRITICAL",
          "confidentialityImpact": "HIGH",
          "integrityImpact": "HIGH",
          "privilegesRequired": "NONE",
          "scope": "UNCHANGED",
          "userInteraction": "NONE",
          "vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N",
          "version": "3.1"
        },
        "exploitabilityScore": 3.9,
        "impactScore": 5.2,
        "source": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
        "type": "Secondary"
      }
    ],
    "ssvcV203": [
      {
        "source": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
        "ssvcData": {
          "id": "CVE-2026-75156",
          "options": [
            {
              "exploitation": "none"
            },
            {
              "automatable": "yes"
            },
            {
              "technicalImpact": "total"
            }
          ],
          "role": "CISA Coordinator",
          "timestamp": "2026-09-08T18:59:35.794768Z",
          "version": "2.0.3"
        }
      }
    ]
  },
  "published": "2026-09-08T17:18:30.393",
  "references": [
    {
      "source": "security@apache.org",
      "url": "https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/71735"
    },
    {
      "source": "security@apache.org",
      "url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread/n3l6z4jfdxj4p0t8l7m6olkq6xsc6f76"
    },
    {
      "source": "security@apache.org",
      "url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2026-59243"
    }
  ],
  "sourceIdentifier": "security@apache.org",
  "vulnStatus": "Awaiting Analysis",
  "weaknesses": [
    {
      "description": [
        {
          "lang": "en",
          "value": "CWE-346"
        }
      ],
      "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.