pysec-2020-16
Vulnerability from pysec
Published
2020-07-17 00:15
Modified
2020-07-24 18:22
Details
An issue was found in Apache Airflow versions 1.10.10 and below. When using CeleryExecutor, if an attack can connect to the broker (Redis, RabbitMQ) directly, it was possible to insert a malicious payload directly to the broker which could lead to a deserialization attack (and thus remote code execution) on the Worker.
Aliases
{ "affected": [ { "package": { "ecosystem": "PyPI", "name": "apache-airflow", "purl": "pkg:pypi/apache-airflow" }, "ranges": [ { "events": [ { "introduced": "0" }, { "fixed": "1.10.11rc1" } ], "type": "ECOSYSTEM" } ], "versions": [ "1.8.1", "1.8.2rc1", "1.8.2", "1.9.0", "1.10.0", "1.10.1b1", "1.10.1rc2", "1.10.1", "1.10.2b2", "1.10.2rc1", "1.10.2rc2", "1.10.2rc3", "1.10.2", "1.10.3b1", "1.10.3b2", "1.10.3rc1", "1.10.3rc2", "1.10.3", "1.10.4b2", "1.10.4rc1", "1.10.4rc2", "1.10.4rc3", "1.10.4rc4", "1.10.4rc5", "1.10.4", "1.10.5rc1", "1.10.5", "1.10.6rc1", "1.10.6rc2", "1.10.6", "1.10.7rc1", "1.10.7rc2", "1.10.7rc3", "1.10.7", "1.10.8rc1", "1.10.8", "1.10.9rc1", "1.10.9", "1.10.10rc1", "1.10.10rc2", "1.10.10rc3", "1.10.10rc4", "1.10.10rc5", "1.10.10" ] } ], "aliases": [ "CVE-2020-11982", "GHSA-9g2w-5f3v-mfmm" ], "details": "An issue was found in Apache Airflow versions 1.10.10 and below. When using CeleryExecutor, if an attack can connect to the broker (Redis, RabbitMQ) directly, it was possible to insert a malicious payload directly to the broker which could lead to a deserialization attack (and thus remote code execution) on the Worker.", "id": "PYSEC-2020-16", "modified": "2020-07-24T18:22:00Z", "published": "2020-07-17T00:15:00Z", "references": [ { "type": "WEB", "url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r7255cf0be3566f23a768e2a04b40fb09e52fcd1872695428ba9afe91%40%3Cusers.airflow.apache.org%3E" }, { "type": "ADVISORY", "url": "https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-9g2w-5f3v-mfmm" } ] }
Loading...
Loading...
Sightings
Author | Source | Type | Date |
---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
- Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.