Skip to content
Log inStart free trial

GHSA-fmx4-26r3-wxpf CVE-2024-22051

Integer overflow in cmark-gfm table parsing extension leads to heap memory corruption

Critical RubyGems
Severity
8.8 / 10
Critical · CVSS 3.1
Exploit chance (EPSS)
1.45%
Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 73.38% of scored vulnerabilities.
Known exploited
No
Not in CISA's catalog
Weakness
CWE-190 Integer Overflow or Wraparound
Fix
0.23.4
Upgrade commonmarker to this version or later

Description

Impact

CommonMarker uses cmark-gfm for rendering Github Flavored Markdown. An integer overflow in cmark-gfm's table row parsing may lead to heap memory corruption when parsing tables who's marker rows contain more than UINT16_MAX columns. The impact of this heap corruption ranges from Information Leak to Arbitrary Code Execution.

If affected versions of CommonMarker are used for rendering remote user controlled markdown, this vulnerability may lead to Remote Code Execution (RCE).

Patches

This vulnerability has been patched in the following CommonMarker release:

  • v0.23.4

Workarounds

The vulnerability exists in the table markdown extensions of cmark-gfm. Disabling any use of the table extension will prevent this vulnerability from being triggered.

References

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Felix Wilhelm of Google's Project Zero for reporting this vulnerability

For more information

If you have any questions or comments about this advisory:

Affected versions

RubyGems

PackageVulnerableFixed in
commonmarker
< 0.23.4
0.23.4

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.

commonmarker RubyGems → 0.23.4

bundler
bundle update commonmarker # Gemfile: gem "commonmarker", ">= 0.23.4"

Severity breakdown

CVSS 3.1 8.8

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H

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

Weakness

CWE-190: Integer Overflow or Wraparound

The product performs a calculation that can produce an integer overflow or wraparound when the logic assumes that the resulting value will always be larger than the original value. This occurs when an integer value is incremented to a value that is too large to store in the associated representation. When this occurs, the value may become a very small or negative number.

How to prevent it
  • Requirements: Ensure that all protocols are strictly defined, such that all out-of-bounds behavior can be identified simply, and require strict conformance to the protocol.
  • Requirements: Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. If possible, choose a language or compiler that performs automatic bounds checking.
  • Architecture and Design: Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482]. Use libraries or frameworks that make it easier to handle numbers without unexpected consequences. Examples include safe integer handling packages such as SafeInt (C++) or IntegerLib (C or C++). [REF-106]
  • Implementation: Perform input validation on any numeric input by ensuring that it is within the expected range. Enforce that the input meets both the minimum and maximum requirements for the expected range. Use unsigned integers where possible. This makes it easier to perform validation for integer overflows. When signed integers are required, ensure that the range check includes minimum values as well as maximum values.
  • Implementation: Understand the programming language's underlying representation and how it interacts with numeric calculation (CWE-681). Pay close attention to byte size discrepancies, precision, signed/unsigned distinctions, truncation, conversion and casting between types, "not-a-number" calculations, and how the language handles numbers that are too large or too small for its underlying representation. [REF-7] Also be careful to account for 32-bit, 64-bit, and other potential differences that may affect the numeric representation.
  • Architecture and Design: For any security checks that are performed on the client side, ensure that these checks are duplicated on the server side, in order to avoid CWE-602. Attackers can bypass the client-side checks by modifying values after the checks have been performed, or by changing the client to remove the client-side checks entirely. Then, these modified values would be submitted to the server.
  • Implementation: Examine compiler warnings closely and eliminate problems with potential security implications, such as signed / unsigned mismatch in memory operations, or use of uninitialized variables. Even if the weakness is rarely exploitable, a single failure may lead to the compromise of the entire system.

References

Advisories

Packages

Other links

Timeline

  1. Published
  2. Last updated by the source
  3. Latest EPSS score
AdvisorySeverityWhy it's related
GHSA-7vh7-fw88-wj87
Several quadratic complexity bugs may lead to denial of service in Commonmarker
Medium Also affects commonmarker
GHSA-48wp-p9qv-4j64
Commonmarker vulnerable to to several quadratic complexity bugs that may lead to denial of service
Medium Also affects commonmarker
GHSA-636f-xm5j-pj9m
Several quadratic complexity bugs may lead to denial of service in Commonmarker
Medium Also affects commonmarker
GHSA-4qw4-jpp4-8gvp
Unbounded resource exhaustion in cmark-gfm autolink extension may lead to denial of service
Medium Also affects commonmarker
GHSA-4642-5mcj-2rqw
Forge: ASN.1 OID first arc truncation in asn1.oidToDer
Low Same weakness, CWE-190
GHSA-4rm8-3hmm-39fg
Pillow: Reachable undefined behavior in native integer operations, potentially leading to denial of service or logic integrity compromise
Medium Same weakness, CWE-190
GHSA-f63g-mx39-3r38
Microsoft Security Advisory CVE-2026-85363 - .NET and Visual Studio Remote Code Execution Vulnerability
High Same weakness, CWE-190
CVE-2026-97229
Integer Overflow or Wraparound in GitLab
Critical Known exploited Same weakness, CWE-190
Is this in your code?

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