VulnerabilityPublished 16 Sep 2026Updated 17 Sep 2026

CVE-2026-76186: Apache Airflow Keycloak provider · Unvalidated Cookie Trust

Affects Apache Airflow Keycloak providerSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 9.1 Critical : upgrade to 0.10.0 as a priority.

Data as of 31 Oct 2026, 08:20 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

9.1Critical

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.8% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 56% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 0.10.0

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: High
Availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, 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: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: 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.
Confidentiality: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: 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: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 16 Sep 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 30 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

ghsa-xhp3-rrf4-c8rv

What to do

Upgrade Apache Airflow Keycloak provider and apache-airflow-providers-keycloak to 0.10.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Apache Software FoundationApache Airflow Keycloak provider	Affected <0.10.0	Fixed in 0.10.0
PyPIapache-airflow-providers-keycloak`pkg:pypi/apache-airflow-providers-keycloak`Other threats	Affected <0.10.0	Fixed in 0.10.0

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

Users should upgrade apache-airflow-providers-keycloak to version 0.10.0 or later, which implements binding of Keycloak tokens to the session identity, preventing mismatched token usage. This is the official fix provided by the vendor. No other mitigation is indicated or necessary once upgraded.

Description

Apache Airflow Keycloak provider versions before 0.10.0 have a security flaw where Keycloak access and refresh tokens are stored in separate unauthenticated cookies without validation against the signed Airflow session token. This allows an attacker with a valid Airflow login and a foreign Keycloak token to gain unauthorized privileges while maintaining their own session identity. The issue affects Airflow 3.3 or later deployments using the vulnerable Keycloak provider versions. Upgrading to apache-airflow-providers-keycloak 0.10.0 or later mitigates this vulnerability by binding tokens to the session identity.

Impact

An attacker with any valid Airflow login and a foreign Keycloak access or refresh token can escalate privileges by combining their session identity with the foreign token's privileges. This leads to unauthorized access and actions under another user's privileges while audit logs and caches misleadingly show the attacker's identity. The vulnerability affects confidentiality and integrity of authorization decisions but does not impact availability. The CVSS score of 9.1 reflects critical severity with network attack vector, no privileges required, no user interaction, and high confidentiality and integrity impact.

CWE-565Reliance on Cookies without Validation and Integrity Checking (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A08:2025: Software or Data Integrity Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product relies on the existence or values of cookies when performing security-critical operations, but it does not properly ensure that the setting is valid for the associated user.
Architecture and Design
Avoid using cookie data for a security-related decision.
Implementation
Perform thorough input validation (i.e.: server side validation) on the cookie data if you're going to use it for a security related decision.
Architecture and Design
Add integrity checks to detect tampering.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Docker Security (opens in a new tab)
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
Access Control (opens in a new tab)
Authorization Testing Automation (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.4.1 (opens in a new tab)
V1.5.3 (opens in a new tab)
V4.1.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Session Credential Falsification through Manipulation (opens in a new tab)
Accessing/Intercepting/Modifying HTTP Cookies (opens in a new tab)
Manipulating Opaque Client-based Data Tokens (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 24 Sep 2026, 05:09 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-565

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats