Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- EPSS is 0.60% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-68868High confidence
Apache Airflow Google provider: google Secret Manager backend: team scope is never applied, exposing every team's Connections and Variables
Apache Software Foundation · Apache Airflow Google provider
6.5MediumCVSS 3.1
Scheduled
Patch availableMedium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityMedium→Operational priority:Medium, unchanged from published severity.unchanged
Compensating controls
- Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
- Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
- Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs Apache Software Foundation Apache Airflow Google provider and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Medium technical severity with no CISA KEV confirmation; remediate through the normal risk-based patch cycle unless local exposure raises the priority.
Patch available01
What, why and how
The Google Cloud Secret Manager secrets backend in Apache Airflow's Google provider never applied the team scope when resolving Connections and Variables: the caller's `team_name` was accepted by the backend but dropped at the internal call boundary, so every lookup resolved against the team-agnostic secret name. In a deployment running multi-team mode with this backend, a task or Dag belonging to one team resolved another team's Connection or Variable, obtaining its credentials in full. No unusual configuration is required beyond enabling multi-team mode and using this backend. Users are advised to upgrade to apache-airflow-providers-google 22.3.0 or later, which builds and applies the team-scoped secret name.
What
The Google Cloud Secret Manager secrets backend in Apache Airflow's Google provider never applied the team scope when resolving Connections and Variables: the caller's `team_name` was accepted by the backend but dropped at the internal call boundary, so every lookup resolved against the team-agnostic secret name. In a deployment running multi-team mode with this backend, a task or Dag belonging to one team resolved another team's Connection or Variable, obtaining its credentials in full. No unusual configuration is required beyond enabling multi-team mode and using this backend. Users are advised to upgrade to apache-airflow-providers-google 22.3.0 or later, which builds and applies the team-scoped secret name.
Why
The product implements access controls via a policy or other feature with the intention to disable or restrict accesses (reads and/or writes) to assets in a system from untrusted agents. However, implemented access controls lack required granularity, which renders the control policy too broad because it allows accesses from unauthorized agents to the security-sensitive assets.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
What
The Google Cloud Secret Manager secrets backend in Apache Airflow's Google provider never applied the team scope when resolving Connections and Variables: the caller's `team_name` was accepted by the backend but dropped at the internal call boundary, so every lookup resolved against the team-agnostic secret name. In a deployment running multi-team mode with this backend, a task or Dag belonging to one team resolved another team's Connection or Variable, obtaining its credentials in full. No unusual configuration is required beyond enabling multi-team mode and using this backend. Users are advised to upgrade to apache-airflow-providers-google 22.3.0 or later, which builds and applies the team-scoped secret name.
Why
The product implements access controls via a policy or other feature with the intention to disable or restrict accesses (reads and/or writes) to assets in a system from untrusted agents. However, implemented access controls lack required granularity, which renders the control policy too broad because it allows accesses from unauthorized agents to the security-sensitive assets.
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor.
02
Exploit reality and attack path
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
Observed exploitation No confirmed evidence
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
Public PoC / exploit material None recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.
- Likely attack path
- a network path → Insufficient Granularity of Access Control → cause the confidentiality, integrity or availability impact described by the vendor
- Attack surface
- Network
- Privileges required
- Low: a basic authenticated account is required
- User interaction
- None
- Attack complexity
- Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
- Security boundary
- Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness. - CWE-1220 ↗
CWE-1220: Insufficient Granularity of Access Control. The product implements access controls via a policy or other feature with the intention to disable or restrict accesses (reads and/or writes) to assets in a system from untrusted agents. However, implemented access controls lack required granularity, which renders the control policy too broad because it allows accesses from unauthorized agents to the security-sensitive assets.
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:NCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRLowPrivileges required: The attacker needs basic user-level privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CHighConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.INoneIntegrity impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.ANoneAvailability impact: No direct loss is represented by this metric.- Post-exploitation / living off the land
- Stolen credentials, tokens and legitimate administration functions may provide continued access without deploying a large custom toolset.
03
Patch and workaround
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
- Status
?
Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change. - Patch available
- Action
- Review the linked authoritative reference and apply the recorded fixed release appropriate to the affected product branch.
- Workaround
- No verified workaround is recorded. If business-safe, reduce exposure to the affected interface and allow only trusted sources until authoritative guidance is available.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 12 Aug 2026 · Last source change 16 Sept 2026, 14:56 UTC · CWE-1220 · Insufficient Granularity of Access Control
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCISA ADP
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-57163
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD enriched
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
- Affected versionsThe structured affected or fixed version information changed.CNA ↗
- Before
- < 22.3.0 · Fixed: An authoritative update reference is available, but the fixed version is not recorded in the structured CVE fields. Check the linked vendor advisory for the applicable release.
- After
- Apache Airflow Google provider: < 22.3.0 · Fixed: An authoritative update reference is available, but the fixed version is not recorded in the structured CVE fields. Check the linked vendor advisory for the applicable release.
- Vendor guidanceAuthoritative vendor guidance changed: added patch: github.com/70869; added remediation: github.com/70869; 1 further additions.security@apache.org ↗
- Before
- no authoritative guidance recorded
- After
- patch: github.com/70869 · remediation: github.com/70869 · vendor advisory: lists.apache.org/03h5y0fmqlh0yf055zlocxh591ozx69x
- Affected versionsThe structured affected or fixed version information changed.CNA ↗
- Before
- < 22.3.0 · Fixed: No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
- After
- < 22.3.0 · Fixed: An authoritative update reference is available, but the fixed version is not recorded in the structured CVE fields. Check the linked vendor advisory for the applicable release.
- Remediation statusRemediation status changed from Awaiting fix to Patch available.security@apache.org ↗
- Before
- Awaiting fix
- After
- Patch available
CVE published
Fixed release or patch reference recorded
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
- CVE
- Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
- CVSS
- Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
- EPSS
- Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
- CWE
- Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
- CNA
- CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
- CISA ADP
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
- NVD
- National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
- CERT / CSIRT
- A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
- PoC
- Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
- CSAF
- Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
- LoTL
- Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.