Overview 17 matches · 15 in Waratek scope · 2 protected · 2 exploited · 1 CISA KEV · 4 public PoC · 2 EPSS ≥ 0.5
17matches
15in Waratek scope88.2%
2protected11.8%
2exploited11.8%
1CISA KEV5.9%
4public PoC23.5%
2EPSS ≥ 0.511.8%
Protected by Waratek
2
11.8%
Rule in development
0
0.0%
Mitigation candidate
3
17.6%
No exploit published
10
58.8%
Outside Waratek scope
0
0.0%
Not applicable
2
11.8%
Withdrawn CVE
0
0.0%
blocked by ARMR today
2
11.8%
partly blocked
0
0.0%
not blocked
15
88.2%
not established
0
0.0%
unrecorded
0
0.0%
split by
peak 6 / year
20173
Protected by Waratek1
No exploit published2
High2
Medium1
blocked by ARMR today1
not blocked2
No public exploit3
20186
Mitigation candidate1
No exploit published3
Not applicable2
Critical1
High2
Medium3
not blocked6
Exploited1
Working exploit published1
No public exploit4
20191
No exploit published1
High1
not blocked1
No public exploit1
20201
No exploit published1
High1
not blocked1
No public exploit1
20212
Mitigation candidate1
No exploit published1
High2
not blocked2
Working exploit published1
No public exploit1
20221
No exploit published1
Medium1
not blocked1
No public exploit1
20232
Mitigation candidate1
No exploit published1
High2
not blocked2
Exploited1
Proof of concept only1
20240
20250
20261
Protected by Waratek1
High1
blocked by ARMR today1
No public exploit1
2017201820192020202120222023202420252026
| CVE | Severity | Published▾ | Status | Exploitation | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2025-54920 | High | 2026-03-16 | Protected by Waratek | No public exploit | This issue affects Apache Spark: before 3.5.7 and 4.0.1. Users are recommended to upgrade to version 3.5.7 or 4.0.1 and above, which fixes the issue. Summary Apache Spark 3.5.4 and earlier versions contain a code execution vulnerability in the Spark History Web UI due to overly permissive Jackson deserialization of event log data. This allows an attacker with access to the Spark event logs directory to inject malicious JSON payloads that trigger deserialization of arbitrary classes, enabling command execution on the host running the Spark History Server. Details The vulnerability arises because the Spark History Server uses Jackson polymorphic deserialization with @JsonTypeInfo.Id.CLASS on SparkListenerEvent objects, allowing an attacker to specify arbitrary class names in the event JSON. This behavior permits instantiating unintended classes, such as org.apache.hive.jdbc.HiveConnection, which can perform network calls or other malicious actions during deserialization. The attacker can exploit this by injecting crafted JSON content into the Spark event log files, which the History Server then deserializes on startup or when loading event logs. For example, the attacker can force the History Server to open a JDBC connection to a remote attacker-controlled server, demonstrating remote command injection capability. Proof of Concept: 1. Run Spark with event logging enabled, writing to a writable directory (spark-logs). 2. Inject the following JSON at the beginning of an event log file: { "Event": "org.apache.hive.jdbc.HiveConnection", "uri": "jdbc:hive2://<IP>:<PORT>/", "info": { "hive.metastore.uris": "thrift://<IP>:<PORT>" } } 3. Start the Spark History Server with logs pointing to the modified directory. 4. The Spark History Server initiates a JDBC connection to the attacker’s server, confirming the injection. Impact An attacker with write access to Spark event logs can execute arbitrary code on the server running the History Server, potentially compromising the entire system. |
| CVE-2023-44487 | High | 2023-10-10 | Mitigation candidate | Exploited | The HTTP/2 protocol allows a denial of service (server resource consumption) because request cancellation can reset many streams quickly, as exploited in the wild in August through October 2023. |
| CVE-2023-22465 | High | 2023-01-04 | No exploit published | Proof of concept only | Http4s is a Scala interface for HTTP services. Starting with version 0.1.0 and prior to versions 0.21.34, 0.22.15, 0.23.17, and 1.0.0-M38, the `User-Agent` and `Server` header parsers are susceptible to a fatal error on certain inputs. In http4s, modeled headers are lazily parsed, so this only applies to services that explicitly request these typed headers. Fixes are released in 0.21.34, 0.22.15, 0.23.17, and 1.0.0-M38. As a workaround, use the weakly typed header interface. |
| CVE-2022-31777 | Medium | 2022-11-01 | No exploit published | No public exploit | 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. |
| CVE-2021-42697 | High | 2021-11-02 | Mitigation candidate | Working exploit published | Akka HTTP 10.1.x before 10.1.15 and 10.2.x before 10.2.7 can encounter stack exhaustion while parsing HTTP headers, which allows a remote attacker to conduct a Denial of Service attack by sending a User-Agent header with deeply nested comments. |
| CVE-2021-21293 | High | 2021-02-02 | No exploit published | No public exploit | blaze is a Scala library for building asynchronous pipelines, with a focus on network IO. All servers running blaze-core before version 0.14.15 are affected by a vulnerability in which unbounded connection acceptance leads to file handle exhaustion. Blaze, accepts connections unconditionally on a dedicated thread pool. This has the net effect of amplifying degradation in services that are unable to handle their current request load, since incoming connections are still accepted and added to an unbounded queue. Each connection allocates a socket handle, which drains a scarce OS resource. This can also confound higher level circuit breakers which work based on detecting failed connections. The vast majority of affected users are using it as part of http4s-blaze-server <= 0.21.16. http4s provides a mechanism for limiting open connections, but is enforced inside the Blaze accept loop, after the connection is accepted and the socket opened. Thus, the limit only prevents the number of connections which can be simultaneously processed, not the number of connections which can be held open. The issue is fixed in version 0.14.15 for "NIO1SocketServerGroup". A "maxConnections" parameter is added, with a default value of 512. Concurrent connections beyond this limit are rejected. To run unbounded, which is not recommended, set a negative number. The "NIO2SocketServerGroup" has no such setting and is now deprecated. There are several possible workarounds described in the refrenced GitHub Advisory GHSA-xmw9-q7x9-j5qc. |
| CVE-2020-7780 | High | 2020-11-27 | No exploit published | No public exploit | This affects the package com.softwaremill.akka-http-session:core_2.13 before 0.5.11; the package com.softwaremill.akka-http-session:core_2.12 before 0.5.11; the package com.softwaremill.akka-http-session:core_2.11 before 0.5.11. For older versions, endpoints protected by randomTokenCsrfProtection could be bypassed with an empty X-XSRF-TOKEN header and an empty XSRF-TOKEN cookie. |
| CVE-2019-10099 | High | 2019-08-07 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Prior to Spark 2.3.3, in certain situations Spark would write user data to local disk unencrypted, even if spark.io.encryption.enabled=true. This includes cached blocks that are fetched to disk (controlled by spark.maxRemoteBlockSizeFetchToMem); in SparkR, using parallelize; in Pyspark, using broadcast and parallelize; and use of python udfs. |
| CVE-2018-17190 | Critical | 2018-11-19 | Not applicable | No public exploit | In all versions of Apache Spark, its standalone resource manager accepts code to execute on a 'master' host, that then runs that code on 'worker' hosts. The master itself does not, by design, execute user code. A specially-crafted request to the master can, however, cause the master to execute code too. Note that this does not affect standalone clusters with authentication enabled. While the master host typically has less outbound access to other resources than a worker, the execution of code on the master is nevertheless unexpected. |
| CVE-2018-11804 | High | 2018-10-24 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Spark's Apache Maven-based build includes a convenience script, 'build/mvn', that downloads and runs a zinc server to speed up compilation. It has been included in release branches since 1.3.x, up to and including master. This server will accept connections from external hosts by default. A specially-crafted request to the zinc server could cause it to reveal information in files readable to the developer account running the build. Note that this issue does not affect end users of Spark, only developers building Spark from source code. |
| CVE-2018-16131 | High | 2018-08-30 | No exploit published | No public exploit | The decodeRequest and decodeRequestWith directives in Lightbend Akka HTTP 10.1.x through 10.1.4 and 10.0.x through 10.0.13 allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption and daemon crash) via a ZIP bomb. |
| CVE-2018-11770 | Medium | 2018-08-13 | Mitigation candidate | Exploited | From version 1.3.0 onward, Apache Spark's standalone master exposes a REST API for job submission, in addition to the submission mechanism used by spark-submit. In standalone, the config property 'spark.authenticate.secret' establishes a shared secret for authenticating requests to submit jobs via spark-submit. However, the REST API does not use this or any other authentication mechanism, and this is not adequately documented. In this case, a user would be able to run a driver program without authenticating, but not launch executors, using the REST API. This REST API is also used by Mesos, when set up to run in cluster mode (i.e., when also running MesosClusterDispatcher), for job submission. Future versions of Spark will improve documentation on these points, and prohibit setting 'spark.authenticate.secret' when running the REST APIs, to make this clear. Future versions will also disable the REST API by default in the standalone master by changing the default value of 'spark.master.rest.enabled' to 'false'. |
| CVE-2018-8024 | Medium | 2018-07-12 | Not applicable | Working exploit published | In Apache Spark 2.1.0 to 2.1.2, 2.2.0 to 2.2.1, and 2.3.0, it's possible for a malicious user to construct a URL pointing to a Spark cluster's UI's job and stage info pages, and if a user can be tricked into accessing the URL, can be used to cause script to execute and expose information from the user's view of the Spark UI. While some browsers like recent versions of Chrome and Safari are able to block this type of attack, current versions of Firefox (and possibly others) do not. |
| CVE-2018-1334 | Medium | 2018-07-12 | No exploit published | No public exploit | 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. |
| CVE-2017-1000118 | High | 2017-10-05 | No exploit published | No public exploit | Akka HTTP versions <= 10.0.5 Illegal Media Range in Accept Header Causes StackOverflowError Leading to Denial of Service |
| CVE-2017-12612 | High | 2017-09-13 | Protected by Waratek | No public exploit | In Apache Spark 1.6.0 until 2.1.1, the launcher API performs unsafe deserialization of data received by its socket. This makes applications launched programmatically using the launcher API potentially vulnerable to arbitrary code execution by an attacker with access to any user account on the local machine. It does not affect apps run by spark-submit or spark-shell. The attacker would be able to execute code as the user that ran the Spark application. Users are encouraged to update to version 2.2.0 or later. |
| CVE-2017-7678 | Medium | 2017-07-12 | No exploit published | No public exploit | 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. |