Apache Airflows /assets/events API returned asset events for every Dag in the deployment, with no filter restricting them to the Dags the caller is authorized to read. Any authenticated user holding asset-read access could therefore enumerate asset events — including the source Dag ID, task ID, run ID and event timestamps — for Dags they have no permission to see. Because the filter was also absent from the count query, total_entries and pagination disclosed the existence of hidden Dags even without inspecting individual rows. Deployments are affected whenever per-Dag access control is used to separate teams or tenants; no special configuration is required. Upgrade to apache-airflow 3.3.2 or later.
The product exposes sensitive information to an actor that is not explicitly authorized to have access to that information.
| Name | Vendor | Start Version | End Version |
|---|---|---|---|
| Airflow | Apache | * | 3.3.2 (excluding) |
There are many different kinds of mistakes that introduce information exposures. The severity of the error can range widely, depending on the context in which the product operates, the type of sensitive information that is revealed, and the benefits it may provide to an attacker. Some kinds of sensitive information include:
Information might be sensitive to different parties, each of which may have their own expectations for whether the information should be protected. These parties include:
Information exposures can occur in different ways:
It is common practice to describe any loss of confidentiality as an “information exposure,” but this can lead to overuse of CWE-200 in CWE mapping. From the CWE perspective, loss of confidentiality is a technical impact that can arise from dozens of different weaknesses, such as insecure file permissions or out-of-bounds read. CWE-200 and its lower-level descendants are intended to cover the mistakes that occur in behaviors that explicitly manage, store, transfer, or cleanse sensitive information.