GHSA-3whq-64q2-qfj6 CVE-2024-32647 PYSEC-2024-208
vyper performs double eval of raw_args in create_from_blueprint
- Severity
- 5.3 / 10
- Medium · CVSS 3.1
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 0.46%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 39.52% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Weakness
- CWE-95 Improper Neutralization of Directives in Dynamically Evaluated Code ('Eval Injection')
- Fix
0.4.0- Upgrade vyper to this version or later
Description
Summary
Using the create_from_blueprint builtin can result in a double eval vulnerability when raw_args=True and the args argument has side-effects.
A contract search was performed and no vulnerable contracts were found in production. In particular, the raw_args variant of create_from_blueprint was not found to be used in production.
Details
It can be seen that the _build_create_IR function of the create_from_blueprint builtin doesn't cache the mentioned args argument to the stack: https://github.com/vyperlang/vyper/blob/cedf7087e68e67c7bfbd47ae95dcb16b81ad2e02/vyper/builtins/functions.py#L1847
As such, it can be evaluated multiple times (instead of retrieving the value from the stack).
PoC
The vulnerability is demonstrated in the following boa test:
src1 = """
c: uint256
"""
deployer = """
created_address: public(address)
deployed: public(uint256)
@external
def get() -> Bytes[32]:
self.deployed += 1
return b''
@external
def create_(target: address):
self.created_address = create_from_blueprint(target, raw_call(self, method_id("get()"), max_outsize=32), raw_args=True, code_offset=3)
"""
Factory = b.loads_partial(src1)
c = Factory.deploy_as_blueprint()
c2 = b.loads(deployer, b'')
c2.create_(c)
c2.deployed()
The output of c2.deployed() is 2 although create_ was called only once and the value was initialized to 0.
Patches
Patched in https://github.com/vyperlang/vyper/pull/3976.
Impact
No vulnerable production contracts were found. Additionally, double evaluation of side-effects should be easily discoverable in client tests. As such, the impact is low.
Affected versions
PyPI
| Package | Vulnerable | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| vyper | < 0.4.0 |
0.4.0 |
How to fix
Move to the fixed version or later with your package manager, update the lockfile, and run your tests. If the package only arrives through another dependency, upgrade that dependency first. If none of its releases pulls a fixed version yet, force the version with your package manager's override.
vyper PyPI → 0.4.0
- pip
pip install --upgrade "vyper>=0.4.0"- poetry
poetry add "vyper>=0.4.0"- uv
uv add "vyper>=0.4.0"
Severity breakdown
CVSS 3.1 5.3
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- None
Weakness
CWE-95: Improper Neutralization of Directives in Dynamically Evaluated Code ('Eval Injection')
The product receives input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes code syntax before using the input in a dynamic evaluation call (e.g. "eval").
How to prevent it
- Architecture and Design, Implementation: If possible, refactor your code so that it does not need to use eval() at all.
- Implementation: Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does. When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, "boat" may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as "red" or "blue." Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
- Implementation: Inputs should be decoded and canonicalized to the application's current internal representation before being validated (CWE-180, CWE-181). Make sure that your application does not inadvertently decode the same input twice (CWE-174). Such errors could be used to bypass allowlist schemes by introducing dangerous inputs after they have been checked. Use libraries such as the OWASP ESAPI Canonicalization control. Consider performing repeated canonicalization until your input does not change any more. This will avoid double-decoding and similar scenarios, but it might inadvertently modify inputs that are allowed to contain properly-encoded dangerous content.
- Implementation: For Python programs, it is frequently encouraged to use the ast.literal_eval() function instead of eval, since it is intentionally designed to avoid executing code. However, an adversary could still cause excessive memory or stack consumption via deeply nested structures [REF-1372], so the python documentation discourages use of ast.literal_eval() on untrusted data [REF-1373].
References
Advisories
Packages
Other links
Timeline
- Published
- Last updated by the source
- Latest EPSS score
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why it's related |
|---|---|---|
| GHSA-2r3x-4mrv-mcxf Vyper: Memory corruption using function calls within tuples / nested calls | Medium | Also affects vyper |
| GHSA-4v7v-gqf9-ww2g Vyper: Call stack corruption when passing complex type containing non-base type members as argument | Medium | Also affects vyper |
| GHSA-vg88-3v92-rjx2 Vyper: Return inside for loop more than 1 level deep | Low | Also affects vyper |
| GHSA-3vcg-j39x-cwfm Vyper's `slice()` may elide side-effects when output length is 0 | Low | Also affects vyper |
| GHSA-qhr6-mgqr-mchm Vyper's `concat()` builtin may elide side-effects for zero-length arguments | Low | Also affects vyper |
| GHSA-h33q-mhmp-8p67 Vyper has a double eval in For List Iter | High | Also affects vyper |
| GHSA-4w26-8p97-f4jp AugAssign evaluation order causing OOB write within the object in Vyper | Critical | Also affects vyper |
| GHSA-2p94-8669-xg86 Vyper's sqrt doesn't define rounding behavior | High | Also affects vyper |
MergeHarbor checks every repository's dependencies against this database, ranks what matters by exploitability and reachability, routes it to the owning team and opens the fix pull request.
Check your repos with MergeHarbor