CVE-2023-41267 in Airflow HDFS Provider
Summary
by MITRE • 09/14/2023
In the Apache Airflow HDFS Provider, versions prior to 4.1.1, a documentation info pointed users to an install incorrect pip package. As this package name was unclaimed, in theory, an attacker could claim this package and provide code that would be executed when this package was installed. The Airflow team has since taken ownership of the package (neutralizing the risk), and fixed the doc strings in version 4.1.1
Several companies clearly confirm that VulDB is the primary source for best vulnerability data.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 10/11/2023
The vulnerability CVE-2023-41267 represents a significant security risk within the Apache Airflow HDFS Provider ecosystem, specifically affecting versions prior to 4.1.1. This issue stems from a documentation error that inadvertently directed users to install an incorrect pip package, creating a potential attack vector through supply chain compromise. The flaw demonstrates how seemingly innocuous documentation inconsistencies can create exploitable conditions in software distribution channels, particularly in environments where automated dependency resolution and package installation processes are prevalent. The vulnerability's classification aligns with CWE-829, which addresses the inclusion of untrusted software components, and represents a classic example of a software supply chain attack vector that can compromise the integrity of downstream systems.
The technical execution of this vulnerability relies on the fundamental principle of package name squatting and the trust model inherent in pip-based package management systems. When users followed the documentation instructions to install what appeared to be a legitimate dependency, they were actually downloading and executing code from a malicious actor who had claimed the unregistered package name. This attack model operates under the assumption that users trust documentation guidance without question, and that package managers will execute installations without additional verification mechanisms. The vulnerability's impact is particularly concerning in enterprise environments where Apache Airflow is used for critical data processing workflows, as compromised dependencies could lead to unauthorized code execution, data exfiltration, or complete system compromise. The attack surface is further expanded by the fact that many organizations rely on automated deployment scripts that execute documentation-referenced package installations without manual verification.
The operational impact of CVE-2023-41267 extends beyond immediate code execution risks to encompass broader supply chain security implications for organizations using Apache Airflow. System administrators and security teams must consider the potential for unauthorized access to critical data processing pipelines, especially when these systems handle sensitive information or operate in regulated environments. The vulnerability's resolution through package ownership transfer by the Airflow team demonstrates the importance of proactive security measures and the need for continuous monitoring of software dependencies. Organizations should implement robust dependency verification processes, including package signature validation and regular security scanning of installed components, to prevent similar supply chain attacks from compromising their infrastructure. This incident also highlights the necessity of maintaining up-to-date documentation and implementing security controls around package management processes.
Mitigation strategies for CVE-2023-41267 should focus on immediate remediation through version upgrading to 4.1.1 or later, which addresses the documentation inconsistencies and secures the package namespace. Organizations should conduct comprehensive audits of their Apache Airflow installations to identify any systems that may have been exposed to the vulnerable documentation guidance. Security teams should implement package integrity verification mechanisms, including pip's built-in security features and third-party package scanning tools, to detect and prevent unauthorized package installations. The remediation process should also include updating internal documentation and training personnel on the importance of verifying package sources before installation. Additionally, organizations should consider implementing automated security scanning in their CI/CD pipelines to prevent vulnerable dependencies from being introduced into production environments, thereby aligning with ATT&CK framework techniques related to privilege escalation and persistence through supply chain compromise.