Hello Everyone,

As we all know, Apache Zeppelin is, by design, a remote code execution 
platform. There are some cases where this does not apply, but for a lot of 
script-style interpreters, the whole point is for the user to run code on the 
server. If there is a problem with the shell interpreter, there is also one 
with python, java, and many others. And this is the same for Jupyter, by the 
way.

If someone files a bug with 'I can run shell, it's a vulnerability' when using 
shell interpreter, it seems to be they are not properly aware of the intended 
use of the system, and the documentation around this may need to be pushed more 
in front so they are aware.

Alternative would be to rm -rf​ all script interpreters? Which would defeat 
most of the purpose of the platform.

My suggestion would be to contest the CVE, works as expected and republish 
shell interpreter.

Cheers,

Michiel
________________________________
From: Jongyoul Lee <jongy...@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2024 11:39
To: users <users@zeppelin.apache.org>; dev <d...@zeppelin.apache.org>
Subject: [External] : [DISCUSS] Shell interpreter

Hello,

I want to discuss Shell interpreter issue with you.

For your information, we had a security report using Shell interpreter to 
execute malicious code with a system account. As you know, it's a kind of 
characteristic of Apache Zeppelin but some contributors including me thought it 
was too risky even if it's a feature. Moreover, I thought that we had some 
workarounds to do similar executions.

However, after releasing it, there were many questions via several channels 
about the deprecation of Shell interpreter.

I would like to follow the community's decision. For one more piece of 
information, we already have a security page to warn the code execution feature 
so we can keep the Shell interpreter without any further treatment.

Could you please give me your opinion on this?

If we conclude keeping it, I'll release a new release of 0.11.2 including Shell 
interpreter again.

Best regards,
Jongyoul Lee

Reply via email to