Open-Source Security Intelligence

Know every vulnerability
before it knows you.

DevGuard continuously monitors your dependencies and alerts you when CVEs like this one affect your stack — with real-time threat intelligence built for developers.

Search

GHSA-52xq-j7v9-v4v2

CriticalCVSS 9.8 / 10
Published Feb 7, 2024·Last modified Nov 22, 2024
Affected Components(0)

No affected components available

Description

Summary

Arrays can be keyed by a signed integer, while they are defined for unsigned integers only. The typechecker doesn't throw when spotting the usage of an int as an index for an array. Typically, negative integers are filtered out at runtime by the bounds checker, but small enough (i.e. large in magnitude, ex. -2**255 + 5) quantities combined with large enough arrays (at least 2**255 in length) can pass the bounds checker, resulting in unexpected behavior.

A contract search was performed, and no production contracts were found to be impacted.

Details

The typechecker allows the usage of signed integers to be used as indexes to arrays. The vulnerability is present in different forms in all versions. Here is an example from 0.3.10: https://github.com/vyperlang/vyper/blob/c150fc49ee9375a930d177044559b83cb95f7963/vyper/semantics/types/subscriptable.py#L127-L137

As can be seen, the validation is performed against IntegerT.any().

PoC

If the array is sufficiently large, it can be indexed with a negative value:

arr: public(uint256[MAX_UINT256])

@external
def set(idx: int256, num: uint256):
    self.arr[idx] = num

For signed integers, the 2's complement representation is used. Because the array was declared very large, the bounds checking will pass (negative values will simply be represented as very large numbers): https://github.com/vyperlang/vyper/blob/a1fd228cb9936c3e4bbca6f3ee3fb4426ef45490/vyper/codegen/core.py#L534-L541

Patches

Patched in https://github.com/vyperlang/vyper/pull/3817.

Impact

There are two potential vulnerability classes: unpredictable behavior and accessing inaccessible elements.

  1. If it is possible to index an array with a negative integer without reverting, this is most likely not anticipated by the developer and such accesses can cause unpredictable behavior for the contract.

  2. If a contract has an invariant in the form assert index < x where both index and x are signed integers, the developer might suppose that no elements on indexes y | y >= x are accessible. However, by using negative indexes this can be bypassed.

The contract search found no production contracts impacted by these two classes of issues.

Risk Scores
Base Score
9.8

The vulnerability can be exploited over the network without needing physical access. It is easy for an attacker to exploit this vulnerability. An attacker does not need any special privileges or access rights. No user interaction is needed for the attacker to exploit this vulnerability. The impact is confined to the system where the vulnerability exists. There is a high impact on the confidentiality of the information. There is a high impact on the integrity of the data. There is a high impact on the availability of the system.

Threat Intelligence
9.0

Active exploitation in the wild has been confirmed. Immediate patching or mitigation is required.

EPSS
1.54%

The exploit probability is very low. The vulnerability is unlikely to be exploited in the next 30 days.

Exploit
Not available

We did not find any exploit available. Neither in GitHub repositories nor in the Exploit-Database.

Scan your project

Continuously monitor your dependencies and get alerted when vulnerabilities like this one affect your stack.

Checkout DevGuard