GHSA-qhr6-mgqr-mchm CVE-2025-47285 PYSEC-2026-2029
Vyper's `concat()` builtin may elide side-effects for zero-length arguments
- Severity
- 0.0 / 10
- Low · CVSS 4.0
- Exploit chance (EPSS)
- 0.46%
- Chance of exploitation in the next 30 days. Higher than 40.21% of scored vulnerabilities.
- Known exploited
- No
- Not in CISA's catalog
- Weakness
- CWE-691 Insufficient Control Flow Management
- Fix
- None yet
- No fixed version published
Description
Impact
concat() may skip evaluation of side effects when the length of an argument is zero. this is due to a fastpath in the implementation which skips evaluation of argument expressions when their length is zero:
https://github.com/vyperlang/vyper/blob/68b68c4b30c5ef2f312b4674676170b8a6eaa316/vyper/builtins/functions.py#L560-L562
in practice, it would be very unusual in user code to construct zero-length bytestrings using an expression with side-effects, since zero-length bytestrings are typically constructed with the empty literal b""; the only way to construct an empty bytestring which has side effects would be with the ternary operator introduced in v0.3.8, e.g. b"" if self.do_some_side_effect() else b"".
the following example demonstrates how the issue would look in user code
counter: public(uint256)
@external
def test() -> Bytes[256]:
a: Bytes[256] = concat(b"" if self.sideeffect() else b"", b"aaaa")
return a
def sideeffect() -> bool:
self.counter += 1
return True
the severity assigned is low, since, as mentioned, this would be a very unusual pattern in user-code.
Patches
fix is tracked in https://github.com/vyperlang/vyper/pull/4644
Workarounds
don't have side effects in expressions which construct zero-length bytestrings.
References
Are there any links users can visit to find out more?
Affected versions
PyPI
| Package | Vulnerable | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| vyper | <= 0.4.2rc1 |
No fix yet |
How to fix
No fixed version has been published yet. Until one is, remove or replace the package, or turn off or isolate the affected feature. This page updates when a fix ships.
Severity breakdown
CVSS 4.0 0.0
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Attack requirements
- Present
- 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
- Exploit maturity
- Proof of concept
Weakness
CWE-691: Insufficient Control Flow Management
The code does not sufficiently manage its control flow during execution, creating conditions in which the control flow can be modified in unexpected ways.
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-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 |
| GHSA-vgf2-gvx8-xwc3 Vyper Does Not Check the Success of Certain Precompile Calls | 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