Ok. Few fixes applied and two reviews (thanks Elad/Jens) waiting a bit more
today to get a bit more eyes. If you want anything in 2.11.1 - this is the
last chance before RC in a few hours finally.

J

On Sat, Feb 14, 2026, 20:26 Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote:

> The PR to merge `v2-11-test` to `v2-11-stable` with release notes is here:
> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/61921
>
> For posterity and so that we are all aware what is the set of changes,
> here it is:
>
> Airflow 2.11.1 (2026-02-14)
> ---------------------------
>
> Significant Changes
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Python 3.8 support removed
> """"""""""""""""""""""""""
> Support for Python 3.8 has been removed, as it has reached end-of-life.
> Airflow 2.11 requires Python 3.10, 3.11, or 3.12.
>
> Publishing timer and timing metrics in seconds is now deprecated
> """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
> In Airflow 3.0, the ``timer_unit_consistency`` setting in the ``metrics``
> section will be
> enabled by default and setting itself will be removed. This will
> standardize all timer and timing metrics to
> milliseconds across all metric loggers.
> **Users Integrating with Datadog, OpenTelemetry, or other metric
> backends** should enable this setting. For users, using
> ``statsd``, this change will not affect you.
> If you need backward compatibility, you can leave this setting disabled
> temporarily, but enabling
> ``timer_unit_consistency`` is encouraged to future-proof your metrics
> setup. (#39908)
>
> The ``core.worker_precheck`` config option is not effective any more
> """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
> Celery provider uses ``celery.worker_precheck`` config option in celery
> provider < 3.5.0
> and as of 3.5.0 it is not used at all. (#48568)
>
> Retrieving historical log templates is disabled in Airflow 2.11.1
> """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
> When you change the log template in Airflow 2.11.1, the historical log
> templates are not retrieved.
> This means that if you have existing logs that were generated using a
> different log template,
> they will not be accessible using the new log template.
> This change is due to potential security issues that could arise from
> retrieving historical log templates,
> which allow Dag Authors to execute arbitrary code in webserver when
> retrieving logs.
> By disabling the retrieval of historical log templates, Airflow 2.11.1
> aims to enhance the security of the
> system and prevent potential vulnerabilities in case the potential of
> executing arbitrary code in webserver
> is important for Airflow deployment.
> Users who need to access historical logs generated with a different log
> template will need to manually
> update their log files to match the naming of their historical log files
> with the latest log template
> configured in Airflow configuration, or they can set the
> "core.use_historical_filename_templates"
> configuration option to True to enable the retrieval of historical log
> templates, if they are fine with
> the Dag Authors being able to execute arbitrary code in webserver when
> retrieving logs. (#61880)
>
> Updated dependencies
> """"""""""""""""""""
> Airflow 2.11.1 includes updates to a number of dependencies including
> connexion, Flask-Session, Werkzeug,
> that were not possible to upgrade before, because the dependencies did not
> have compatible versions
> with Airflow 2.11.0, but we worked together with the community to update
> them. Many thanks to connexion
> team and a number of community members to help with the updates so that we
> could upgrade to newer
> versions and get rid of some dependency versions that had known security
> vulnerabilities (#51681)
>
> Bug fixes
> """""""""
> - Add proxy values to be masked by secrets manager (#61906)
> - Masking details while creating connections using json & uri (#61882)
> - Fix redaction of illegal args (#61883)
> - Fix stuck queued tasks by calling executor fail method and invoking
> failure callbacks (#53038)
> - Fix recursion depth error in _redact_exception_with_context (#61797)
> - Avoid warning when passing none as dataset alias (#61791)
> - Add pool name validation to avoid XSS from the DAG file (#61732)
> - Prevent scheduler to crash due to RecursionError when making a SQL query
> (#55778)
> - Fix root logger level cache invalidation in LoggerMutationHelper (#61644)
> - update null event values to empty string in downgrade for migration
> revision_id d75389605139 (#57131)
> - Fix WeightRule spec (#53947)
> - Correctly treat request on reschedule sensors as resetting after each
> reschedule (#51410) (#52638)
> - Allow more empty loops before stopping log streaming (#52614) (#52636)
> - Ensuring XCom return value can be mapped for dynamically-mapped
> @task_group's (#51668)
> - Fix archival for cascading deletes by archiving dependent tables first
> (#51952) (#52211)
> - Stop streaming task logs if end of log mark is missing (#51904)
> - Fix bad width w/no options in multi-select DAG parameter (#51516)
> - Fix remove filter button visibility in Pools list page (#51161)
> - Fix delete button visibility in search filters (#51100)
> - Fix migration from 2.2.0 to 2.11.0 for Sqlite (#50745)
> - Check if stand alone dag processor is active in get_health endpoint
> (#48612)
>
> J.
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 14, 2026 at 12:14 AM Pavankumar Gopidesu <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Indeed it's a huge effort Jarek, Looking forward to testing it.. :)
>>
>> Regards,
>> Pavan
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 13, 2026 at 11:08 PM Jens Scheffler <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Jarek,
>> >
>> > thanks for putting all the efforts in making a 2.11.1! I am looking
>> > forward and promise to contribute testing!
>> >
>> > Jens
>> >
>> > On 13.02.26 22:24, Jarek Potiuk wrote:
>> > > Hello here,
>> > >
>> > > Another milestone (it does take a bit longer than I anticipated ..
>> > > estimation and guessing is difficult when you have ):
>> > >
>> > > * we have a green v2-11-test build with all tests passing for all
>> > databases
>> > > - including sqlite. The constraints for 2-11 have been updated today
>> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/commits/constraints-2-11/ (two
>> times)
>> > -
>> > > and the dependencies are "refreshed"
>> > > * i reviewed/merged all remaining PRs / Issues that were marked for
>> 2.11
>> > > from those people who submitted them (in the past and recently) - that
>> > also
>> > > includes some rework to make those "better" and handle more edge-cases
>> > > * I opened last three PRs that were outstanding from past discussions
>> > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/milestone/114  -> and look forward
>> to
>> > > reviews/making them green/merging
>> > >
>> > > Once this is done I will make an RC for airflow 2.11.1 and fab
>> provider
>> > > 1.5.4 that should be tested together.
>> > >
>> > > I have a kind request to everyone who is looking forward to 2.11.1 -
>> to
>> > get
>> > > prepared for testing next week, I am planning to have the
>> voting/testing
>> > > open for 5 days, in order to get more feedback and potential issue
>> > > resolving time.
>> > >
>> > > The whole experience with 2.11.1 for me is kind of proof of the "if
>> > > sometimes is painful - do it more often" - many months passed from
>> > > releasing 2.11.0 and this caused a natural decay .. and bringing it
>> back
>> > to
>> > > a fresh state is really, really painful.
>> > >
>> > > J.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Mon, Feb 9, 2026 at 2:08 AM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> Hello Everyone. I am almost done with all the tests and fixes and
>> > >> preparation for RC candidates. The last PR
>> > >> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/61633 solves the stability db
>> > >> connection issues with flask-session (still have some sqlite test
>> issues
>> > >> but it's a nuance).
>> > >>
>> > >> I will be proceeding with preparing the release and adding a few last
>> > >> "dependency/security" related fixes tomorrow.
>> > >>
>> > >> I am also going to merge very few, very small and targeted (and safe
>> to
>> > >> merge) fixes - such as https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/61644
>> . I
>> > >> aim to make an RC in the next few days.
>> > >>
>> > >> But If you have any (very small) backport fix that you would like to
>> get
>> > >> to v2-11-test to fix it in 2.11.1 -> please open a PR against
>> > "v2-11-test"
>> > >> and let me know - ping me on slack ideally. However I have a request
>> > there
>> > >> - I will tag those who made those PRs and I will expect that they
>> will
>> > test
>> > >> them in their system while we are testing RC candidates.
>> > >>
>> > >> J,
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> On Sat, Feb 7, 2026 at 4:41 PM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>> Hello here.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> I just achieved a significant milestone.
>> > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/51681 which I worked on for
>> > 2.11
>> > >>> got green finally (it took quite a bit more effort than I expected).
>> > >>>
>> > >>> There is still at least one issue I am working on and few
>> "backports"
>> > to
>> > >>> male but I wanted to get the 2-11-test to the state where the CI is
>> > green
>> > >>> so that subsequent fixes can be merged with tests and usual
>> process. In
>> > >>> order to make reviews easier - I split the big PR I worked on into
>> > several
>> > >>> smaller ones focused on groups of changes that will be easier to
>> > review and
>> > >>> approve (hopefully). I also added appropriate people - I think as
>> > >>> reviewers, so please take a look at reviewing those quickly. It is
>> > >>> **UNLIKELY** that those PRs will get green on their own - but once
>> we
>> > merge
>> > >>> them all, the 51681 is proof that this will happen eventually.
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> * Synchronize GitHub workflows and Breeze tooling for 2.11 branch:
>> > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/61598
>> > >>> * Synchronize FAB provider with 1.5.4 version
>> > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/61601
>> > >>> * Synchronize common compat to 1.2.1 in v2-11-test branch
>> > >>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/61602
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Please review (and approve ?) so I can proceed..
>> > >>>
>> > >>> J,
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> On Thu, Feb 5, 2026 at 11:29 PM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> > >>>
>> > >>>> Interesting that you ask now - I literally am working on in as you
>> > speak
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> On Thu, Feb 5, 2026 at 5:28 PM Damian Shaw <
>> > [email protected]>
>> > >>>> wrote:
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>> What's the current thinking on a 2.11.1?
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> Totally understandable if this was too much work and has been
>> > dropped,
>> > >>>>> but just trying to gauge what advice I should giving to cautious
>> > upgraded
>> > >>>>> on a path to Airflow 3.x.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> Damian
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> -----Original Message-----
>> > >>>>> From: Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]>
>> > >>>>> Sent: Sunday, October 5, 2025 3:44 AM
>> > >>>>> To: [email protected]
>> > >>>>> Subject: Upcoming Airflow 2.11.1 release [was: [DISCUSS] Possible
>> > >>>>> Werkzeug vulnerabilities fix for Airflow 2]
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> Hello here,
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> *TL;DR; I wanted to start a process of preparing to 2.11.1 release
>> > and
>> > >>>>> I would like the community to be aware of it as I am taking the
>> role
>> > of
>> > >>>>> release manager for it. *
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> I will need help with reviewing PRs from the committers (I will
>> try
>> > to
>> > >>>>> move it forward even during the Summit, but realistically
>> speaking,
>> > I think
>> > >>>>> I will start release process some time after the Summit as likely
>> a
>> > lot of
>> > >>>>> us won't have the usual attention/time.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> *First: good news.* We are unblocked with long overdue Werkzeug
>> > upgrade
>> > >>>>> - with a serious vulnerabiity (via Connexion 2.15.0) - there are
>> > also few
>> > >>>>> small security-related patches that we want to implement
>> alongside.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> *Then: not so good news* (well, depends for whom): while we are
>> going
>> > >>>>> to release 2.11.1,  this is is going to be **critical bugfixes
>> only +
>> > >>>>> security** release. There will be absolutely no new features, or
>> > fixes
>> > >>>>> to - even annoying - issues in 2.11 if they are not critical.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> You can skip the rest of the message if you are not interested in
>> > more
>> > >>>>> details or do not want to be involved in the 2.11.1 release
>> testing.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> *MORE DETAILS:*
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> *Again - what is going to be included?*
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> Only absolutely critical issues and security related changes.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> If you think there is an absolutely critical fix that should be
>> > >>>>> included - please let me know and explain why - here in this
>> > discussion.
>> > >>>>> But the approach I am going to take is that only absolutely
>> critical/
>> > >>>>> security related fixes should be included in this release - and
>> > there has
>> > >>>>> to be a really good justification to fix anything in 2.11.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> I will also absolutely expect, that whoever wants to get any fix
>> > there
>> > >>>>> and we will agree here that it's a good idea, it's **on the one
>> who
>> > proposes
>> > >>>>> it** to make a green PR to v2-11-test with the fix and that they
>> 100%
>> > >>>>> commit to testing and verifying it when the release candidate is
>> out.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> If you think that something should be included in 2.11.1 because
>> of
>> > >>>>> security reasons - please do not write about it in public. Send an
>> > email to
>> > >>>>> [email protected] explaining the issue and ideally
>> > solution
>> > >>>>> / PR to backport. Generally follow our Security Policy
>> > >>>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/security/policy
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> *Help needed*
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> Eventually - I will need community help in testing it - especially
>> > for
>> > >>>>> authentication/FAB integration because this part will be changed a
>> > bit. I
>> > >>>>> will ask for a bit longer time of testing likely and will need
>> > community
>> > >>>>> support from people who are already at 2.11.0 to test it.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> *A little more details on wha triggered it*
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> It took a LOONG time, but finally - with help of some friends of
>> mine
>> > >>>>> who did a little nudging and conveniently just before coming back
>> > from my
>> > >>>>> vacations - which will happen on Monday BTW - we finally have
>> > Connexion
>> > >>>>> 2.15.0 released. This was a bit of a blocker that we waited for -
>> > this
>> > >>>>> **should** help us to solve one of the longest standing issue with
>> > >>>>> Werkzeug dependency version of ours having a critical
>> vulnerability.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> I think (that was few months ago) I fixed all the compatibility
>> > issues
>> > >>>>> for Airflow 2.11.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> It was done some time ago on a version of Connexion built from a
>> > branch
>> > >>>>> and it required a few changes (the way how percent encoding of
>> urls
>> > are
>> > >>>>> handled by Werkzeug 2.3.0 and few internal things + i had to
>> > implement a
>> > >>>>> bit of a "hack" on Serialization in flask-session, this PR
>> > >>>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/51681 - should likely
>> > >>>>> eventually lead to a green build.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> *A little more details on what is going to happen*
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> I will need to do a few more steps to get there:
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> 1) I need to release Fab provider 1.5.4 (initially beta, but when
>> I
>> > get
>> > >>>>> it
>> > >>>>> tested) from providers/fab/v1-5 (working on it). This is needed to
>> > >>>>> "unblock" some of the depenendency limits in 1.5.3 and adapt
>> > provider to a
>> > >>>>> new flask-session that is needed for the upgrade..
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> 2) I will continue with the "connexion-2.15" PR
>> > >>>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/51681 to use this new
>> > provider
>> > >>>>> version, get constraints generated - and **hopefullly** get
>> > v2-11-test
>> > >>>>> branch green (might require some tweaks to the old branches - they
>> > are a
>> > >>>>> bit rusty I am afraid)
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> 3) then I will apply remaining critical changes, That will be the
>> > time
>> > >>>>> when anyone who thinks a change should be included, should work on
>> > >>>>> backporting critical/implementing security related PRs.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> What this will allow (fingers crossed it will not be too
>> difficult) -
>> > >>>>> is to release 2.11.1 version of Airflow with bumped Werkzeug and
>> few
>> > other
>> > >>>>> dependencies, and critical changes that we plan for 2.11.1 -
>> > following the
>> > >>>>> regular release process.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> J.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> On Sun, Jun 22, 2025 at 8:55 AM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]>
>> > wrote:
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>> Good news. As a result of our request, Connection 2.15.0rc2 was
>> > >>>>>> released in PyPI this morning with Flask>3. I am running now
>> tests
>> > >>>>>> with it
>> > >>>>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/51681 and we **finally**
>> > have
>> > >>>>>> non-conflicting dependencies in Airflow 2.11 with it.
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> It still fails - i.e. we will have to fix things with session
>> > handling
>> > >>>>>> (we knew we will have to do it because of flask-session upgrade)
>> but
>> > >>>>>> this is something we are now unblocked with :).
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>   Hopefully soon we will get rid of the Werkzeug drama.
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> root@a20ed58d4f59:/opt/airflow# pip freeze | grep lask
>> > >>>>>> Flask==2.3.3
>> > >>>>>> Flask-AppBuilder==4.5.2
>> > >>>>>> Flask-Babel==2.0.0
>> > >>>>>> Flask-Bcrypt==1.0.1
>> > >>>>>> Flask-Caching==2.3.1
>> > >>>>>> Flask-JWT-Extended==4.7.1
>> > >>>>>> Flask-Limiter==3.11.0
>> > >>>>>> Flask-Login==0.6.3
>> > >>>>>> Flask-Session==0.8.0
>> > >>>>>> Flask-SQLAlchemy==2.5.1
>> > >>>>>> Flask-WTF==1.2.2
>> > >>>>>> root@a20ed58d4f59:/opt/airflow# pip freeze | grep erkzeug
>> > >>>>>> *Werkzeug==3.1.3*
>> > >>>>>> root@a20ed58d4f59:/opt/airflow#
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> J.
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 7:44 AM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]>
>> > >>>>> wrote:
>> > >>>>>>> Dear Airflow community,
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> Thank you. You are amazing. With all the upvotes and comments we
>> > had
>> > >>>>>>> the contributor of connexion working on bringing Flask 2.3.3+
>> back
>> > to
>> > >>>>>>> the upcoming Connexion release
>> > >>>>>>> https://github.com/spec-first/connexion/pull/2058/
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> Particularly Kamil - thanks for the thoughtful comments and the
>> > >>>>>>> diligent check on what Flask version we need. We are currently
>> at
>> > 2.2
>> > >>>>>>> in Airflow 2.11 but I checked that if Connexion sets their
>> limit to
>> > >>>>>>>> =2.3.3, we should be able update to that version in 2.11 (and
>> it's
>> > >>>>>>> good in general as 2.3+ is now the only recommended branch still
>> > >>>>>>> being "supported" for Flask 2 for security issues it seems. So
>> we
>> > get
>> > >>>>>>> additional benefit there that we will be less likely to hit
>> similar
>> > >>>>> issues until Airflow 2 EOL.
>> > >>>>>>> J.
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 8:07 PM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]>
>> > >>>>> wrote:
>> > >>>>>>>> Thank you Kamil - that's very thoughtful and nice to see your
>> > >>>>>>>> message back on the devlist :D
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 7:38 PM Kamil Breguła <
>> [email protected]
>> > >
>> > >>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > >>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>> I proposed to split the new connexion release into two
>> versions.
>> > >>>>>>>>> First release one release that supports the new Werkzereg
>> > release,
>> > >>>>>>>>> and then release a new Connexion release that supports Flask 3
>> > >>>>>>>>> only. This is not ideal, because Airflow 2 will still be on an
>> > >>>>>>>>> unsupported version of Connexion, but we will have at least
>> one
>> > >>>>>>>>> release that has the new Werkzeug version and has a fix for
>> the
>> > CVE
>> > >>>>>>>>> bug. This might be easier to do, as I understand that
>> connexion
>> > >>>>>>>>> might not want to support Flask 2 if there is no specific end
>> > date
>> > >>>>>>>>> for when other dependencies will support Flask 3, but it may
>> > still
>> > >>>>>>>>> turn out to be enough for us.
>> > >>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>> śr., 18 cze 2025 o 08:54 Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]>
>> > >>>>> napisał(a):
>> > >>>>>>>>>> I WOULD LIKE TO TAP INTO POWER OF OUR COMMUNITY... PLEASE
>> HELP.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>> We again had another issue with FAB where the root cause was
>> our
>> > >>>>>>>>>> old Werkzeug version - that we cannot upgrade until now) -
>> old
>> > >>>>>>>>>> Werkzeug
>> > >>>>>>>>> does
>> > >>>>>>>>>> not support `scrypt` hashing algorithm and latest FAB version
>> > >>>>>>>>> defaulted
>> > >>>>>>>>>> password hashing to scrypt - we have a workaround but we will
>> > >>>>>>>>>> have to
>> > >>>>>>>>> make
>> > >>>>>>>>>> a more complete fix with FAB provider. And I am sure Airflow
>> 2
>> > >>>>>>>>>> users
>> > >>>>>>>>> will
>> > >>>>>>>>>> have more and more problems as the time passes.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>> I think there is a **real** chance with the Connexion team
>> > >>>>>>>>>> working on
>> > >>>>>>>>>> 2.15.0 - https://pypi.org/project/connexion/2.15.0rc1/
>> that we
>> > >>>>>>>>>> can finally get rid of it - in Both Airflow 2 and Airflow 3.
>> But
>> > >>>>>>>>>> we have one
>> > >>>>>>>>> problem ->
>> > >>>>>>>>>> Connexion 2.15.0rc1 seems to require Flask 3 where we cannot
>> > >>>>>>>>>> upgrade
>> > >>>>>>>>> to
>> > >>>>>>>>>> Flask 3 because of the FAB <3 limit. I started a discussion
>> > about
>> > >>>>>>>>>> it
>> > >>>>>>>>> here:
>> > >>>>>
>> https://github.com/spec-first/connexion/pull/1992#issuecomment-2976
>> > >>>>>>>>> 706491
>> > >>>>>>>>>> and explained that it would be great if Connexion 2.15.0
>> > >>>>>>>>>> supported
>> > >>>>>>>>> still
>> > >>>>>>>>>> flask 2.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>> And it would be great if more people could support it and
>> > explain
>> > >>>>>>>>> that this
>> > >>>>>>>>>> would be a major win for the Airflow community if they could
>> > >>>>>>>>>> relax
>> > >>>>>>>>> this.
>> > >>>>>>>>>> I do not think this is a big problem for them - the
>> explanation
>> > >>>>>>>>>> we
>> > >>>>>>>>> had from
>> > >>>>>>>>>> them is "hey Flask 2 is really old" - but there is no "real"
>> > >>>>> reason.
>> > >>>>>>>>>> On the other hand migrating FAB to Flask 3 would like be a
>> very
>> > >>>>>>>>> complex and
>> > >>>>>>>>>> risky thing (and Daniel already struggles with just
>> SQLalchemy
>> > >>>>>>>>> upgrade and
>> > >>>>>>>>>> FAB 5 so it would be too much to put the pressure on him).
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>> Can you please help and upvote/comment on
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> https://github.com/spec-first/connexion/pull/1992#issuecomment-2976
>> > >>>>>>>>> 706491
>> > >>>>>>>>>> I would (and the whole community) really, really appreciate
>> it.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>> J.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 13, 2025 at 11:16 AM Jarek Potiuk <
>> [email protected]
>> > >
>> > >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Hello everyone,
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> As you might know, Airflow 2 has a long-time issue with not
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> being
>> > >>>>>>>>> able to
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> upgrade Werkzeug dependency to a non-vulnerable version and
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> that
>> > >>>>>>>>> raises a
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> lot of alarms for users who run CVE checks on Airflow.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> We've been waiting for a long time for that - but it looks
>> like
>> > >>>>>>>>> there is
>> > >>>>>>>>>> a
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> light in a tunnel. We have two options that we can attempt:
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> 1) Connexion 2.15.0.rc1
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> 2) Releasing a package that will patch Werkzeug 2.2.3 with
>> > >>>>>>>>> backported CVE
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> fixes
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Recently Google team attempted to back-port and test fixes
>> to
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> older version of Werkzeug and I helped to get through to the
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> maintainers -
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/pallets/werkzeug/discussions/3034 -
>> however
>> > >>>>>>>>> they are
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> not really willing to make that into regular release -
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> reasoning
>> > >>>>>>>>>> explained
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> in the discussion.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> However, after many months of discussions and at least 3
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> attempts
>> > >>>>>>>>> to bump
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> dependencies for Connexion - we seem to have an RC candidate
>> > >>>>>>>>> (2.15.0rc1
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> https://pypi.org/project/connexion/2.15.0rc1/) that lifts
>> the
>> > >>>>>>>>> limit for
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Werkzeug (released 4 days ago).
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> There were some breaking changes in Werkzeug that made it so
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> long
>> > >>>>>>>>> and
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> difficult but I think we should be able to release a 2.11.1
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> version
>> > >>>>>>>>> of
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Airflow with it
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> I made  first attempt to migrate - here:
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/51681 and while I
>> was
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> able
>> > >>>>>>>>> to
>> > >>>>>>>>>> work
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> out non-conflicting dependencies and bump Werkzeug, there
>> are
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> some
>> > >>>>>>>>> things
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> to be fixed with session handling and there is still one
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> outstanding problem - FAB requires Flask < 3 and currently
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Connexion 2.0.15rc1
>> > >>>>>>>>>> requires
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> flask >= 3 - which FAB (even upcoming FAB 5) does not
>> support.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> And
>> > >>>>>>>>> likely
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> migrating to Flask 3 is **not** an option for us anyway.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> I started discussion here with those who worked on the
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Connexion
>> > >>>>>>>>> patch
>> > >>>>>>>>>> for
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Werkzeug to see if that is a "hard" limit..:
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> https://github.com/spec-first/connexion/pull/1992#issuecomment-2969
>> > >>>>>>>>> 565640
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Alternative option - patch package:
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> We also have a "last-resort" approach that we are looking at
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> with
>> > >>>>>>>>> the
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Google team. We might want to release a "werkzeug-patch"
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> package
>> > >>>>>>>>> that
>> > >>>>>>>>>> will
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> apply the CVE patches to Werkzeug 2.2.3
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Option 1) is not clear yet if it is possible due to Flask 3
>> /
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Flask
>> > >>>>>>>>> 2  -
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> and it would only work for 2.11.1 - we need to make some
>> fixes
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> and
>> > >>>>>>>>> change
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> dependencies for Airflow to make it work.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Option 2) Is hacky (I am talking to Werkzeug maintainers
>> what
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> do
>> > >>>>>>>>> they
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> think about it as we would likely need to have at least a
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> comment
>> > >>>>>>>>> in the
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> CVE advisory that this package fixes it as well) . But it
>> has
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> the
>> > >>>>>>>>> benefit
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> that it will **just work** by installing the patch on
>> basically
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> all
>> > >>>>>>>>> past
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Airflow versions
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Just wanted to let everyone know it happens and ask if you
>> have
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> any opinions on those.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>>>>>> J.
>> > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> > >>>>> ________________________________
>> > >>>>>   Strike Technologies, LLC (“Strike”) is part of the GTS family of
>> > >>>>> companies. Strike is a technology solutions provider, and is not a
>> > broker
>> > >>>>> or dealer and does not transact any securities related business
>> > directly
>> > >>>>> whatsoever. This communication is the property of Strike and its
>> > >>>>> affiliates, and does not constitute an offer to sell or the
>> > solicitation of
>> > >>>>> an offer to buy any security in any jurisdiction. It is intended
>> > only for
>> > >>>>> the person to whom it is addressed and may contain information
>> that
>> > is
>> > >>>>> privileged, confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure.
>> > >>>>> Distribution or copying of this communication, or the information
>> > contained
>> > >>>>> herein, by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited.
>> > If you
>> > >>>>> have received this communication in error, please immediately
>> notify
>> > Strike
>> > >>>>> at [email protected], and delete and destroy any copies
>> > >>>>> hereof.
>> > >>>>> ________________________________
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> CONFIDENTIALITY / PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any
>> > >>>>> attachments are intended solely for the addressee. This
>> transmission
>> > is
>> > >>>>> covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C
>> > ''2510-2521.
>> > >>>>> The information contained in this transmission is confidential in
>> > nature
>> > >>>>> and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L.
>> > 106-102,
>> > >>>>> 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to attorney-client
>> or
>> > other
>> > >>>>> legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for
>> any
>> > purpose
>> > >>>>> other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly
>> prohibited,
>> > and may
>> > >>>>> subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law.
>> > If you
>> > >>>>> are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please
>> DESTROY
>> > ALL
>> > >>>>> COPIES RECEIVED and confirm destruction to the sender via return
>> > >>>>> transmittal.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> > >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>> > >>>>>
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>> >
>> >
>>
>

Reply via email to