LiveActive security incident?Get immediate response
CVE Record

CVE-2020-17495: django-celery-results through 1.2.1 stores task results in the database.

django-celery-results through 1.2.1 stores task results in the database. Among the data it stores are the variables passed into the tasks. The variables may contain sensitive cleartext information that does not belong unencrypted in the database.

UnknownCVSS not scoredNot KEV-listedUpdated
Discuss exposureBack to CVEs
Glexia's TakeAutomated analysismoderate

Security readout for executives and security teams

Plain-English summary

django-celery-results through 1.2.1 can place Celery task inputs into the database as part of stored task results. If those inputs include passwords, tokens, personal data, or other secrets, people or systems with database access may see sensitive information in cleartext.

Executive priority

Prioritize systems that process credentials, customer data, payment data, health data, or confidential business records through Celery tasks. The issue is not shown as actively exploited, but it can expand the blast radius of any database access incident.

Technical view

The CVE describes cleartext persistence of task variables by django-celery-results through 1.2.1. The provided record has no CVSS, CWE, CPE, or named fixed version. Treat this as a confidentiality and data-handling issue tied to how applications populate Celery task arguments and expose their results database.

Likely exposure

Exposure is most likely in Django applications using django-celery-results through 1.2.1 with database-backed result storage and tasks that receive sensitive values as arguments.

Exploitation context

The source bundle does not show active exploitation, and CISA KEV is false. Practical impact depends on database, backup, admin UI, support, or logging access to stored task results.

Researcher notes

Evidence is sparse: the CVE record and linked issue establish the cleartext storage concern, but not a CVSS score, exploit activity, affected CPEs, or fixed release. Validate exposure from application behavior, not package presence alone.

Mitigation direction

  • Inventory django-celery-results usage and confirm deployed versions.
  • Check current upstream project guidance before selecting an upgrade or configuration change.
  • Review Celery task arguments for secrets, credentials, tokens, or regulated personal data.
  • Replace sensitive task arguments with opaque identifiers where application design allows.
  • Restrict database, backup, and admin access to stored task result data.
  • Assess whether retained task results containing sensitive data need deletion under internal policy.

Validation and detection

  • Search dependencies for django-celery-results and identify versions through 1.2.1.
  • Inspect result backend tables for stored task arguments or metadata containing sensitive values.
  • Review representative Celery tasks for sensitive parameters passed into asynchronous jobs.
  • Confirm who can read task result tables, backups, exports, and admin tooling.
  • Document whether current project releases identify a fixed version or recommended mitigation.
Prepared
Confidence
medium
Sources
3

Public sources used

Generated from the cited source records. This long-tail analysis has not been individually reviewed by a named human.

Potential ATT&CK relevance

Conservative CVE-to-ATT&CK context

These mappings and lookup hints may be relevant to the vulnerability behavior, CWE, affected product, or exposure path. Glexia-inferred context is not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, CWE, or CVE Program mapping.

ATT&CK lookup starting points

Use these exact CWE pages and searches to review the Glexia ATT&CK library from this CVE's weakness and description context.

description · low confidence lookup

Database behavior lookup

The CVE wording references database injection or access, so collection and exfiltration review may help. This is a Glexia inferred lookup path, not an official MITRE, ATT&CK, or CVE Program mapping.

Open ATT&CK lookup
cve · low confidence lookup

CVE-2020-17495 mapping review

Open the CVE-to-ATT&CK bridge for reviewed, inferred, or future official mappings tied to this CVE.

Open ATT&CK lookup
Vulnerability profileCVE Program record
Severity
Unknown
CVSS
Not scored
Known Exploited
No
Published
Official CVE source material

CNA and ADP enrichment extracted from CVE v5

These fields come from the CVE record and ADP containers, not from Glexia's Take. They preserve time-varying source decisions such as CISA SSVC, KEV status, CVSS metrics, and provider references.

0CVSS vectors
0Timeline events
0ADP providers
2Source links

CVSS and timeline data

No CVSS vectors or timeline events were available in the normalized CVE source material.

Source materials

Affected products

Products and packages named in the record

VendorProductVersion / packageStatus
n/an/an/aListed
Weakness

CWE details

No CWE listed

CWE links open Glexia weakness intelligence pages with official CWE context, developer remediation guidance, and related CVE mappings.