RUSTSEC-2026-0076 GHSA-xrf2-5r3p-5wgj
Panic in Signature Hint Decoding During Verification
Description
During ML-DSA verification the serialized hint values are decoded as
specified in algorithm 22 HintBitUnpack of FIPS 204, subsection
7.1. The
algorithm requires that the cumulative hint counters per row of the
hint vector are strictly increasing and below a maximum value which
depends on the choice of ML-DSA parameter set (line 4).
In libcrux-ml-dsa, hint decoding did not check the boundedness of the cumulative hint counter of the last row of the hint vector.
Impact
A manipulated invalid hint can cause an out-of-bounds memory access since the hint decoding logic may attempt to read outside the bounds of the serialized signature, causing a runtime panic.
Mitigation
Starting from version 0.0.8, hint decoding will check the cumulative
hint counter of the last row as well.
Affected versions
crates.io
| Package | Vulnerable | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| libcrux-ml-dsa | < 0.0.8 |
0.0.8 |
| libcrux-ml-dsa | >= 0.0.0-0, < 0.0.8 |
0.0.8 |
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.
libcrux-ml-dsa crates.io → 0.0.8
- cargo
cargo update -p libcrux-ml-dsa --precise 0.0.8
Severity breakdown
CVSS 4.0 0.0
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/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)
- None
- Availability (vulnerable system)
- High
- Confidentiality (subsequent systems)
- None
- Integrity (subsequent systems)
- None
- Availability (subsequent systems)
- None
Weakness
CWE-125: Out-of-bounds Read
The product reads data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.
How to prevent it
- 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. To reduce the likelihood of introducing an out-of-bounds read, ensure that you validate and ensure correct calculations for any length argument, buffer size calculation, or offset. Be especially careful of relying on a sentinel (i.e. special character such as NUL) in untrusted inputs.
- Architecture and Design: Use a language that provides appropriate memory abstractions.
CWE-1285: Improper Validation of Specified Index, Position, or Offset in Input
The product receives input that is expected to specify an index, position, or offset into an indexable resource such as a buffer or file, but it does not validate or incorrectly validates that the specified index/position/offset has the required properties.
How to prevent it
- 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.
References
Packages
Other links
Timeline
- Published
- Last updated by the source
Related advisories
| Advisory | Severity | Why it's related |
|---|---|---|
| GHSA-fhvh-vw7h-9xf3 libcrux-ml-dsa: Signature Verification on AVX2 Platforms Mishandles Edge Case | High | Also affects libcrux-ml-dsa |
| RUSTSEC-2026-0126 AVX2 Implementation Did Not Fully Reduce Intermediate Values | Not rated yet | Also affects libcrux-ml-dsa |
| GHSA-cp57-fq8g-qh6v libcrux has an Incorrect Check of Signer Response Norm During Verification | High | Also affects libcrux-ml-dsa |
| GHSA-2cgv-28vr-rv6j libcrux incorrectly calculates on aarch64 | High | Also affects libcrux-ml-dsa |
| GHSA-9v9v-9qvf-h2hj Pillow: Heap over-read in WMF/EMF rendering via 16-bit dimension truncation (Windows builds) | High | Same weakness, CWE-125 |
| GHSA-v9pv-5gc8-w2m6 Pillow multi-frame loaders can reuse stale native image storage after mode transitions | Critical | Same weakness, CWE-125 |
| GHSA-h3v5-h239-pg29 Electron: Off-screen rendering on macOS trusts GPU-supplied frame geometry | Low | Same weakness, CWE-125 |
| GHSA-3qxv-5xgr-q7w9 Electron: Frame subscription trusts GPU-supplied frame geometry | Low | Same weakness, CWE-125 |
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