CVE-2024-29735
CVE Descriptions
Apache Airflow: Potentially harmful permission changing by log task handler
Improper Preservation of Permissions vulnerability in Apache Airflow.This issue affects Apache Airflow from 2.8.2 through 2.8.3. Airflow's local file task handler in Airflow incorrectly set permissions for all parent folders of log folder, in default configuration adding write access to Unix group of the folders. In the case Airflow is run with the root user (not recommended) it added group write permission to all folders up to the root of the filesystem. If your log files are stored in the home directory, these permission changes might impact your ability to run SSH operations after your home directory becomes group-writeable. This issue does not affect users who use or extend Airflow using Official Airflow Docker reference images ( https://hub.docker.com/r/apache/airflow/ ) - those images require to have group write permission set anyway. You are affected only if you install Airflow using local installation / virtualenv or other Docker images, but the issue has no impact if docker containers are used as intended, i.e. where Airflow components do not share containers with other applications and users. Also you should not be affected if your umask is 002 (group write enabled) - this is the default on many linux systems. Recommendation for users using Airflow outside of the containers: * if you are using root to run Airflow, change your Airflow user to use non-root * upgrade Apache Airflow to 2.8.4 or above * If you prefer not to upgrade, you can change the https://airflow.apache.org/docs/apache-airflow/stable/configurations-ref.html#file-task-handler-new-folder-permissions to 0o755 (original value 0o775). * if you already ran Airflow tasks before and your default umask is 022 (group write disabled) you should stop Airflow components, check permissions of AIRFLOW_HOME/logs in all your components and all parent directories of this directory and remove group write access for all the parent directoriesCVE Informations
Related Weaknesses
| Weakness Name | Source | |
|---|---|---|
| Improper Preservation of Permissions The product does not preserve permissions or incorrectly preserves permissions when copying, restoring, or sharing objects, which can cause them to have less restrictive permissions than intended. |
Metrics
| Metrics | Score | Severity | CVSS Vector | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| V3.1 | 5.3 | MEDIUM |
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
More informations
Base: Exploitabilty MetricsThe Exploitability metrics reflect the characteristics of the thing that is vulnerable, which we refer to formally as the vulnerable component. Attack Vector This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. Network The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers). Attack Complexity This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker’s control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability. High successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. Privileges Required This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability. Low The attacker requires privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources. User Interaction This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable component. None The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any user. Base: Scope MetricsThe Scope metric captures whether a vulnerability in one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope. Scope Formally, a security authority is a mechanism (e.g., an application, an operating system, firmware, a sandbox environment) that defines and enforces access control in terms of how certain subjects/actors (e.g., human users, processes) can access certain restricted objects/resources (e.g., files, CPU, memory) in a controlled manner. All the subjects and objects under the jurisdiction of a single security authority are considered to be under one security scope. If a vulnerability in a vulnerable component can affect a component which is in a different security scope than the vulnerable component, a Scope change occurs. Intuitively, whenever the impact of a vulnerability breaches a security/trust boundary and impacts components outside the security scope in which vulnerable component resides, a Scope change occurs. Unchanged An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority. Base: Impact MetricsThe Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability on the component that suffers the worst outcome that is most directly and predictably associated with the attack. Analysts should constrain impacts to a reasonable, final outcome which they are confident an attacker is able to achieve. Confidentiality Impact This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information resources managed by a software component due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. None There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component. Integrity Impact This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. High There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component. Availability Impact This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. None There is no impact to availability within the impacted component. Temporal MetricsThe Temporal metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability, the existence of any patches or workarounds, or the confidence in the description of a vulnerability. Environmental MetricsThese metrics enable the analyst to customize the CVSS score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability. |
134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0 |
EPSS
EPSS Score
EPSS Percentile
Products Mentioned
Configuraton 0
Apache>>Airflow >> Version From (including) 2.8.2 To (including) 2.8.4
- Apache>>Airflow >> Version 2.8.2 (Open CPE detail)
- Apache>>Airflow >> Version 2.8.2 (Open CPE detail)
- Apache>>Airflow >> Version 2.8.2 (Open CPE detail)
- Apache>>Airflow >> Version 2.8.2 (Open CPE detail)
- Apache>>Airflow >> Version 2.8.3 (Open CPE detail)
- Apache>>Airflow >> Version 2.8.3 (Open CPE detail)
- Apache>>Airflow >> Version 2.8.4 (Open CPE detail)
- Apache>>Airflow >> Version 2.8.4 (Open CPE detail)
