** UNSUPPORTED WHEN ASSIGNED ** The Apache Spark UI offers the possibility to enable ACLs via the configuration option spark.acls.enable. With an authentication filter, this checks whether a user has access permissions to view or modify the application. If ACLs are enabled, a code path in HttpSecurityFilter can allow someone to perform impersonation by providing an arbitrary user name. A malicious user might then be able to reach a permission check function that will ultimately build a Unix shell command based on their input, and execute it. This will result in arbitrary shell command execution as the user Spark is currently running as. This issue was disclosed earlier as CVE-2022-33891, but incorrectly claimed version 3.1.3 (which has since gone EOL) would not be affected. NOTE: This vulnerability only affects products that are no longer supported by the maintainer. Users are recommended to upgrade to a supported version of Apache Spark, such as version 3.4.0.

In Apache Spark versions prior to 3.4.0, applications using spark-submit can specify a 'proxy-user' to run as, limiting privileges. The application can execute code with the privileges of the submitting user, however, by providing malicious configuration-related classes on the classpath. This affects architectures relying on proxy-user, for example those using Apache Livy to manage submitted applications. Update to Apache Spark 3.4.0 or later, and ensure that spark.submit.proxyUser.allowCustomClasspathInClusterMode is set to its default of "false", and is not overridden by submitted applications.

A stored cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerability in Apache Spark 3.2.1 and earlier, and 3.3.0, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary JavaScript in the web browser of a user, by including a malicious payload into the logs which would be returned in logs rendered in the UI.

The Apache Spark UI offers the possibility to enable ACLs via the configuration option spark.acls.enable. With an authentication filter, this checks whether a user has access permissions to view or modify the application. If ACLs are enabled, a code path in HttpSecurityFilter can allow someone to perform impersonation by providing an arbitrary user name. A malicious user might then be able to reach a permission check function that will ultimately build a Unix shell command based on their input, and execute it. This will result in arbitrary shell command execution as the user Spark is currently running as. This affects Apache Spark versions 3.0.3 and earlier, versions 3.1.1 to 3.1.2, and versions 3.2.0 to 3.2.1.

Apache Spark supports end-to-end encryption of RPC connections via "spark.authenticate" and "spark.network.crypto.enabled". In versions 3.1.2 and earlier, it uses a bespoke mutual authentication protocol that allows for full encryption key recovery. After an initial interactive attack, this would allow someone to decrypt plaintext traffic offline. Note that this does not affect security mechanisms controlled by "spark.authenticate.enableSaslEncryption", "spark.io.encryption.enabled", "spark.ssl", "spark.ui.strictTransportSecurity". Update to Apache Spark 3.1.3 or later

In Apache Spark 2.4.5 and earlier, a standalone resource manager's master may be configured to require authentication (spark.authenticate) via a shared secret. When enabled, however, a specially-crafted RPC to the master can succeed in starting an application's resources on the Spark cluster, even without the shared key. This can be leveraged to execute shell commands on the host machine. This does not affect Spark clusters using other resource managers (YARN, Mesos, etc).

In Apache Spark 1.0.0 to 2.1.2, 2.2.0 to 2.2.1, and 2.3.0, when using PySpark or SparkR, it's possible for a different local user to connect to the Spark application and impersonate the user running the Spark application.

In Apache Spark before 2.2.0, it is possible for an attacker to take advantage of a user's trust in the server to trick them into visiting a link that points to a shared Spark cluster and submits data including MHTML to the Spark master, or history server. This data, which could contain a script, would then be reflected back to the user and could be evaluated and executed by MS Windows-based clients. It is not an attack on Spark itself, but on the user, who may then execute the script inadvertently when viewing elements of the Spark web UIs.