Handle unmodified sensitived fields when updating connections (#53943) by pierrejeambrun · Pull Request #53973 · apache/airflow

pierrejeambrun · 2025-07-31T12:36:33Z

Manual backport of #53943

…#53943) * Fix redacted values editing * Small improvements * Small adjustments * Update UI and fix some errors * Address PR comments (cherry picked from commit 0abcfdf)

The apache#53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data.

The #53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data.

…mation (#54088) The #53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data. (cherry picked from commit f5a88d9) Co-authored-by: Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com>

…mation (apache#54088) The apache#53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data. (cherry picked from commit f5a88d9) Co-authored-by: Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com>

…mation (#54088) (#54100) The #53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data. (cherry picked from commit f5a88d9) Co-authored-by: Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com>

…he#54088) The apache#53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data.

pierrejeambrun · 2025-07-31T12:36:33Z

Manual backport of #53943

…#53943) * Fix redacted values editing * Small improvements * Small adjustments * Update UI and fix some errors * Address PR comments (cherry picked from commit 0abcfdf)

The apache#53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data.

The #53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data.

…mation (#54088) The #53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data. (cherry picked from commit f5a88d9) Co-authored-by: Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com>

…mation (apache#54088) The apache#53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data. (cherry picked from commit f5a88d9) Co-authored-by: Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com>

…mation (#54088) (#54100) The #53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data. (cherry picked from commit f5a88d9) Co-authored-by: Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com>

…he#54088) The apache#53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data.

pierrejeambrun · 2025-07-31T12:36:33Z

Manual backport of #53943

…#53943) * Fix redacted values editing * Small improvements * Small adjustments * Update UI and fix some errors * Address PR comments (cherry picked from commit 0abcfdf)

The apache#53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data.

The #53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data.

…mation (#54088) The #53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data. (cherry picked from commit f5a88d9) Co-authored-by: Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com>

…mation (apache#54088) The apache#53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data. (cherry picked from commit f5a88d9) Co-authored-by: Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com>

…mation (#54088) (#54100) The #53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data. (cherry picked from commit f5a88d9) Co-authored-by: Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com>

…he#54088) The apache#53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data.

pierrejeambrun · 2025-07-31T12:36:33Z

Manual backport of #53943

…#53943) * Fix redacted values editing * Small improvements * Small adjustments * Update UI and fix some errors * Address PR comments (cherry picked from commit 0abcfdf)

The apache#53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data.

The #53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data.

…mation (#54088) The #53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data. (cherry picked from commit f5a88d9) Co-authored-by: Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com>

…mation (apache#54088) The apache#53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data. (cherry picked from commit f5a88d9) Co-authored-by: Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com>

…mation (#54088) (#54100) The #53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data. (cherry picked from commit f5a88d9) Co-authored-by: Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com>

…he#54088) The apache#53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data.

pierrejeambrun · 2025-07-31T12:36:33Z

Manual backport of #53943

…#53943) * Fix redacted values editing * Small improvements * Small adjustments * Update UI and fix some errors * Address PR comments (cherry picked from commit 0abcfdf)

The apache#53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data.

The #53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data.

…mation (#54088) The #53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data. (cherry picked from commit f5a88d9) Co-authored-by: Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com>

…mation (apache#54088) The apache#53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data. (cherry picked from commit f5a88d9) Co-authored-by: Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com>

…mation (#54088) (#54100) The #53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data. (cherry picked from commit f5a88d9) Co-authored-by: Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com>

…he#54088) The apache#53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data.

pierrejeambrun · 2025-07-31T12:36:33Z

Manual backport of #53943

…#53943) * Fix redacted values editing * Small improvements * Small adjustments * Update UI and fix some errors * Address PR comments (cherry picked from commit 0abcfdf)

The apache#53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data.

The #53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data.

…mation (#54088) The #53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data. (cherry picked from commit f5a88d9) Co-authored-by: Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com>

…mation (apache#54088) The apache#53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data. (cherry picked from commit f5a88d9) Co-authored-by: Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com>

…mation (#54088) (#54100) The #53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data. (cherry picked from commit f5a88d9) Co-authored-by: Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com>

…he#54088) The apache#53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data.

pierrejeambrun · 2025-07-31T12:36:33Z

Manual backport of #53943

…#53943) * Fix redacted values editing * Small improvements * Small adjustments * Update UI and fix some errors * Address PR comments (cherry picked from commit 0abcfdf)

The apache#53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data.

The #53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data.

…mation (#54088) The #53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data. (cherry picked from commit f5a88d9) Co-authored-by: Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com>

…mation (apache#54088) The apache#53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data. (cherry picked from commit f5a88d9) Co-authored-by: Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com>

…mation (#54088) (#54100) The #53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data. (cherry picked from commit f5a88d9) Co-authored-by: Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com>

…he#54088) The apache#53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data.

pierrejeambrun · 2025-07-31T12:36:33Z

Manual backport of #53943

…#53943) * Fix redacted values editing * Small improvements * Small adjustments * Update UI and fix some errors * Address PR comments (cherry picked from commit 0abcfdf)

The apache#53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data.

The #53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data.

…mation (#54088) The #53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data. (cherry picked from commit f5a88d9) Co-authored-by: Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com>

…mation (apache#54088) The apache#53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data. (cherry picked from commit f5a88d9) Co-authored-by: Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com>

…mation (#54088) (#54100) The #53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data. (cherry picked from commit f5a88d9) Co-authored-by: Jarek Potiuk <jarek@potiuk.com>

…he#54088) The apache#53973 introduced a change in the model of handling of the sensitive connection data in the Airlfow UI. Previoiusly our agreed model included capability of reading sensitive data bu the users who have Connection Configuraiton role. However in 3.0.4 we changeed the model so that those users have "write-only" access - they can write the sensitive data, but they cannot read the data via API or the UI once it is written. WHile not a security vulnerability on it's own, it's a security improvement that allows to mitigate some scenarios, especially when connection editing user credentials are stolen. This PR clarifies the model and properly communicates it to the users clearly indicating the difference implemented in 3.0.4 and the model of our security and clearly explaining that before 3.0.4 that was a delibearate choice of the model that the connection editing users had access to the sensitive data.

Handle unmodified sensitived fields when updating connections (apache…
5a7b8f3
…#53943) * Fix redacted values editing * Small improvements * Small adjustments * Update UI and fix some errors * Address PR comments (cherry picked from commit 0abcfdf)

pierrejeambrun requested review from amoghrajesh, ashb, bbovenzi, bugraoz93, ephraimbuddy, jason810496, jscheffl, kaxil, rawwar, ryanahamilton and shubhamraj-git as code owners July 31, 2025 12:36

boring-cyborgBot added area:API Airflow's REST/HTTP API area:task-sdk area:UI Related to UI/UX. For Frontend Developers. labels Jul 31, 2025

pierrejeambrun mentioned this pull request Jul 31, 2025
Handle unmodified sensitived fields when updating connections #53943
Merged

ashb approved these changes Jul 31, 2025
View reviewed changes

pierrejeambrun merged commit 75df727 into apache:v3-0-testJul 31, 2025
77 checks passed

pierrejeambrun deleted the backport-53943 branch July 31, 2025 13:47

This was referenced Aug 4, 2025
Clarify our security model for sensitive connection information #54088
Merged
Export import for connections for airflowctl is broken in main #54090
Closed

github-actionsBot mentioned this pull request Aug 4, 2025
[v3-0-test] Clarify our security model for sensitive connection information (#54088) #54100
Merged

ashb mentioned this pull request Aug 5, 2025
Status of testing Apache Airflow 3.0.4rc2 and TaskSDK 1.0.4rc1 #54124
Closed
82 tasks