GHSA-799X-QP47-8QWQ

Vulnerability from github – Published: 2026-06-01 09:31 – Updated: 2026-06-02 18:31
VLAI
Details

Apache Airflow's EmailOperator and the underlying airflow.utils.email helpers established SMTP STARTTLS connections without verifying the remote certificate when the deployment used [email] smtp_starttls=True without [email] smtp_ssl. An attacker positioned between the worker and the configured SMTP server (network MITM — typical hostile-network attack-surface for environments where the SMTP relay sits outside the worker's trust boundary) could present a self-signed certificate, have the worker complete the STARTTLS handshake silently, and capture the SMTP AUTH credentials and message contents the worker forwarded.

This CVE covers the core apache-airflow side of the same root cause already covered for the SMTP provider by CVE-2026-41016 (published 2026-04-27, covering apache-airflow-providers-smtp). Users who already applied the SMTP-provider fix from CVE-2026-41016 should additionally upgrade apache-airflow to 3.2.2 or later to cover the core-side path through airflow.utils.email. Affects deployments configured with smtp_starttls=True and smtp_ssl=False where the SMTP relay is reachable across a less-trusted network segment than the worker.

Users are advised to upgrade to apache-airflow 3.2.2 or later.

Show details on source website

{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2026-49267"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [
      "CWE-295"
    ],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2026-06-01T09:16:20Z",
    "severity": "MODERATE"
  },
  "details": "Apache Airflow\u0027s EmailOperator and the underlying `airflow.utils.email` helpers established SMTP STARTTLS connections without verifying the remote certificate when the deployment used `[email] smtp_starttls=True` without `[email] smtp_ssl`. An attacker positioned between the worker and the configured SMTP server (network MITM \u2014 typical hostile-network attack-surface for environments where the SMTP relay sits outside the worker\u0027s trust boundary) could present a self-signed certificate, have the worker complete the STARTTLS handshake silently, and capture the SMTP AUTH credentials and message contents the worker forwarded.\n\nThis CVE covers the **core apache-airflow side** of the same root cause already covered for the SMTP provider by `CVE-2026-41016` (published 2026-04-27, covering `apache-airflow-providers-smtp`). Users who already applied the SMTP-provider fix from CVE-2026-41016 should additionally upgrade `apache-airflow` to 3.2.2 or later to cover the core-side path through `airflow.utils.email`. Affects deployments configured with `smtp_starttls=True` and `smtp_ssl=False` where the SMTP relay is reachable across a less-trusted network segment than the worker.\n\nUsers are advised to upgrade to `apache-airflow` 3.2.2 or later.",
  "id": "GHSA-799x-qp47-8qwq",
  "modified": "2026-06-02T18:31:28Z",
  "published": "2026-06-01T09:31:15Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-49267"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/65346"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://lists.apache.org/thread/6v2ds757000msmjmovnnqryqzks83ps0"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

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.

Loading…

Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.

Loading…

Loading…