GHSA-f5x6-7qgp-jhf3 CVE-2023-37902 PYSEC-2023-133
ecrecover can return undefined data if signature does not verify
- Severity
- 0.0 / 10
- Medium · CVSS 4.0
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 0.57%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 47.38% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Weakness
- CWE-252 Unchecked Return Value
- Fix
0.3.10- Upgrade vyper to this version or later
Description
Impact
the ecrecover precompile does not fill the output buffer if the signature does not verify, see https://github.com/ethereum/go-ethereum/blob/b058cf454b3bdc7e770e2b3cec83a0bcb48f55ee/core/vm/contracts.go#L188. however, the ecrecover builtin will still return whatever is at memory location 0.
this means that the if the compiler has been convinced to write to the 0 memory location with specially crafted data (generally, this can happen with a hashmap access or immutable read) just before the ecrecover, a signature check might pass on an invalid signature.
A contract search was performed. Most uses of ecrecover are used for erc2612-style permit implementations, which typically look like:
assert _owner != empty(address)
assert block.timestamp <= _deadline
nonce: uint256 = self.nonces[_owner]
digest: bytes32 = keccak256(
concat(
b"\x19\x01",
self.DOMAIN_SEPARATOR,
keccak256(_abi_encode(PERMIT_TYPEHASH, _owner, _spender, _value, nonce, _deadline))
)
)
assert ecrecover(digest, convert(_v, uint256), convert(_r, uint256), convert(_s, uint256)) == _owner
in this case, the immutable PERMIT_TYPEHASH is loaded into ecrecover's output buffer right before ecrecover(), and so the output of ecrecover() here when the signature is invalid will be the value of PERMIT_TYPEHASH. in this case, since PERMIT_TYPEHASH is not a valid address, it will never compare == to _owner, and so the behaviour is exactly the same as if ecrecover() returned 0 in this case.
in general, a contract could have unexpected behavior (i.e. mistakenly pass this style of signature check) if an immutable representing a real address (ex. OWNER) was read right before the ecrecover operation.
Patches
v0.3.10 (with 019a37ab98ff53f04fecfadf602b6cd5ac748f7f and #3586)
Workarounds
Is there a way for users to fix or remediate the vulnerability without upgrading?
References
Are there any links users can visit to find out more?
Affected versions
PyPI
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 → 0.3.10
- pip
pip install --upgrade "vyper>=0.3.10"- poetry
poetry add "vyper>=0.3.10"- uv
uv add "vyper>=0.3.10"
Severity breakdown
CVSS 4.0 0.0
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Attack requirements
- None
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
- None
- Integrity (vulnerable system)
- Low
- Availability (vulnerable system)
- None
- Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
- None
- Integrity (subsequent systems)
- None
- Availability (subsequent systems)
- None
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-252: Unchecked Return Value
The product does not check the return value from a method or function, which can prevent it from detecting unexpected states and conditions.
How to prevent it
- Implementation: Check the results of all functions that return a value and verify that the value is expected.
- Implementation: For any pointers that could have been modified or provided from a function that can return NULL, check the pointer for NULL before use. When working with a multithreaded or otherwise asynchronous environment, ensure that proper locking APIs are used to lock before the check, and unlock when it has finished [REF-1484].
- Implementation: Ensure that you account for all possible return values from the function.
- Implementation: When designing a function, make sure you return a value or throw an exception in case of an error.
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