Skip to content

Fission Container Executor Function PodSpec Injection Leading to Node Escape

Critical severity GitHub Reviewed Published May 26, 2026 in fission/fission • Updated Jun 30, 2026

Package

github.com/fission/fission (Go)

Affected versions

<= 1.23.0

Patched versions

1.24.0

Description

Summary

Fission's Container Executor path lets a tenant supply Function.spec.podspec directly; the executor merges it into the executor-built podspec and creates a Deployment whose pods run the user's container image.

Details

Two flaws compounded:

  1. pkg/apis/core/v1/validation.go::FunctionSpec.Validate only checked that spec.PodSpec != nil when executorType: container; it did not inspect the content of spec.PodSpec.
  2. pkg/executor/util/merge.go::MergePodSpec unconditionally forwarded hostPID, hostNetwork, hostIPC, hostPath volumes, serviceAccountName, and container privileged into the Deployment spec via the container-executor sink
    (pkg/executor/executortype/container/deployment.go::getDeploymentSpec).

A tenant with only functions.fission.io/create could deploy a Function with a crafted podspec that mounted the host root filesystem and shared host namespaces. The executor — running under its high-privilege SA, which holds
deployments/create on the function namespace — created that Deployment on the tenant's behalf, turning Function-create into effective deployments/create with arbitrary pod-security configuration.

This is the Function-CRD sibling of GHSA-gx55-f84r-v3r7 / GHSA-wmgg-3p4h-48x7, with a lower attack threshold: regular function developers typically hold functions/create but not environments/create.

Impact

A tenant with only functions.fission.io/create is escalated to node escape via a privileged, host-namespace pod scheduled by the executor.

Fix

Fixed in #3391 and released in v1.24.0.

  • FunctionSpec.Validate now calls ValidatePodSpecSafety("Function.spec.podspec", spec.PodSpec) after the existing spec.PodSpec == nil check.
  • The Function validating webhook is already registered on verbs=create;update, so it picks up the new validation with no marker change.
  • The same merge-layer strip and per-container sanitize used for the Environment path applies here, since the container-executor sink calls util.MergePodSpec.

See GHSA-gx55-f84r-v3r7 for the detailed fix.

Behavioural change

Functions whose spec.podspec sets host namespaces, hostPath volumes, container privileged/allowPrivilegeEscalation, dangerous Linux capabilities, or a serviceAccountName override are now rejected at admission. Legitimate
container-executor functions that set image, command, args, env, resources, nodeSelector, tolerations, affinity, non-hostPath volumes, or volumeMounts are unaffected.

References

@sanketsudake sanketsudake published to fission/fission May 26, 2026
Published by the National Vulnerability Database Jun 10, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Jun 30, 2026
Reviewed Jun 30, 2026
Last updated Jun 30, 2026

Severity

Critical

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Changed
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
High
Availability
High

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(19th percentile)

Weaknesses

Improper Privilege Management

The product does not properly assign, modify, track, or check privileges for an actor, creating an unintended sphere of control for that actor. Learn more on MITRE.

Improper Access Control

The product does not restrict or incorrectly restricts access to a resource from an unauthorized actor. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-50563

GHSA ID

GHSA-v455-mv2v-5g92

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.