CVE-2025-69219
Apache Airflow Providers Http 5.1.0 – 6.0.0
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2025-69219 is a high-severity Improper Control of Dynamically-Managed Code Resources (CWE-913) vulnerability in Apache Airflow Providers Http. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Reflective Code Loading (T1620); ranked in the top 50% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to AC-3 (Access Enforcement) and AC-6 (Least Privilege) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2025-69219 is a code execution vulnerability (CWE-913) affecting Apache Airflow, with a CVSS v3.1 base score of 8.8 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H). It allows a user with database access to craft a malicious database entry that triggers arbitrary code execution on the Triggerer component. This effectively grants the attacker the same permissions as a Dag Author. The vulnerability was published on 2026-03-09.
An attacker requires low privileges, specifically access to the Airflow database, which is not a typical or recommended access pattern. Successful exploitation leads to remote code execution on the Triggerer, enabling privilege escalation to Dag Author levels and potential high-impact compromise of confidentiality, integrity, and availability. Although direct database access is uncommon in Airflow deployments, the low attack complexity and network accessibility increase the risk for misconfigured environments.
Advisories recommend upgrading to version 6.0.0 of the affected provider to mitigate the issue entirely. Relevant resources include the Apache Airflow GitHub pull request at https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/61662, the Apache mailing list thread at https://lists.apache.org/thread/zjkfb2njklro68tqzym092r4w65m5dq0, and the OSS-Security announcement at http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2026/03/09/1.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-208401
Vulnerability Data
A user with access to the DB could craft a database entry that would result in executing code on Triggerer - which gives anyone who have access to DB the same permissions as Dag Author. Since direct DB access is…
more
not usual and recommended for Airflow, the likelihood of it making any damage is low. You should upgrade to version 6.0.0 of the provider to avoid even that risk.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 1 hardening rule · 1 OS baseline
—
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Access enforcement directly stops unauthorized reads/writes to dynamic code resources by applying authorization checks at access time.
Least privilege reduces the set of subjects that can reach or modify dynamic code resources, limiting the weakness's reach.
Isolating security functions from non-security code prevents unintended manipulation of dynamically managed executable resources.
Process isolation keeps each process's dynamic code resources in separate domains, blocking cross-process tampering.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Secure SDLC practices explicitly include controls that prevent improper handling of dynamic code resources.
Blocking unauthorized code execution directly limits the ability to abuse dynamically-managed resources.
Runtime-environment monitoring can detect exploitation of the weakness but does not prevent it.
Vulnerability identification can surface instances of CWE-913 but does not mitigate the root weakness.
Hardened configuration baselines can restrict dynamic code execution and variable access at runtime.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Security testing can detect dynamic code weaknesses but does not prevent them at design or coding time.
Secure development lifecycle mandates controls on dynamic code generation and resource management.
Application security requirements explicitly address restrictions on dynamic code execution and resource access.
Secure architecture principles require design controls that prevent improper dynamic code resource manipulation.
Secure coding standards directly prohibit unsafe dynamic code resource handling and injection patterns.
Hardening callouts derived
Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).
Windows 10 (1 rule)
- V-220726 Data Execution Prevention (DEP) must be configured to at least OptOut. prevents CWE-913