By Null Ventures MCP platform
Menu

vulnerability / NVI-00016442 / Revision 1

Apache Airflow exposes unreadable DAG identifiers in the scheduling dependencies graph

GitHub lists this reviewed advisory for apache-airflow. Published version ranges and source prerequisites are shown below; this is not an inspection of a visitor’s application.

source listedactiveGHSA-3322-mjxh-9mp5CVE-2026-48891

This report has not inspected your inventory, configuration, deployed build, reachability or evidence. A catalog listing and a severity score do not establish exposure or compromise.

01 / Meaning

Why it matters

Published affected context helps an owner decide what evidence to gather. This report has not examined your application.

CVSS

4.3 medium

GitHub source severity; exploitability and local consequence require separate evidence.

As of · GitHub Advisory Database

02 / Applicability

The affected context

Affected versions, configuration prerequisites and known exclusions are public. Confirm each one against the deployed service.

apache-airflow

source listed
  • < 3.3.0

A bug in Apache Airflow's `/ui/dependencies` scheduling graph endpoint applied the caller's readable-Dag filter to the top-level serialized Dag key but still emitted referenced Dag IDs through the `dep.source` and `dep.target` fields of trigger / sensor dependency entries. An authenticated UI user with read permission on some Dags could enumerate the identifiers of other Dags they were not authorized to read by inspecting the dependency graph for trigger / sensor references. Affects deployments that rely on per-Dag read scoping to keep Dag identifiers private across teams. This is a residual gap in the fix for CVE-2026-28563, which filtered the top-level Dag key but did not propagate the filter into the trigger / sensor dep-source / dep-target fields. Users who already upgraded for CVE-2026-28563 should additionally upgrade to `apache-airflow` 3.3.0 or later to cover the residual trigger / sensor dependency leak.

GitHub Advisory Database

03 / Response

What to do next

  1. investigate

    Identify the exact component and deployed version, examine the linked publisher’s conditions, and retain evidence of any mitigation.

    Confirm current vendor support, compatibility and deployment evidence. This report has not tested a fix in your system. GitHub Advisory Database

A fixed release is not deployment evidence.

Check current vendor support and compatibility. After making a change, verify the deployed build and relevant runtime conditions. Keep the evidence, owner and time. An updated lockfile alone does not prove what is running.

04 / Limits

What this report cannot establish

  • Customer inventory, deployment, reachability and exploitation have not been inspected.
Read the collection and interpretation limits ↗

05 / Provenance

Sources you can inspect

Each assertion retains its source. Mirrored records may repeat one underlying publisher; additional links are not independent corroboration.

  1. GHSA-3322-mjxh-9mp5 ↗

    GitHub Advisory Database · vendor advisory

    Observed . GitHub Advisory Database; CC-BY-4.0. Each advisory links its original attribution. Null normalizes fields.

Public revision history

Only published revisions appear here. Routine fetches do not create a material-change event.

  1. Revision 1 ·

    First indexed by Null; source disclosure date is shown separately.

Read the public revision data ↗

The next step is private

Bring the question into your environment.

The connected workflow is a development preview for inventory, contextual matching, owner decisions and evidence-based verification. No system-specific result is generated by this page.

See the synthetic workflow preview ↗