Security
Headlines
HeadlinesLatestCVEs

Headline

CVE-2022-29219

Lodestar is a TypeScript implementation of the Ethereum Consensus specification. Prior to version 0.36.0, there is a possible consensus split given maliciously-crafted AttesterSlashing or ProposerSlashing being included on-chain. Because the developers represent uint64 values as native javascript numbers, there is an issue when those variables with large (greater than 2^53) uint64 values are included on chain. In those cases, Lodestar may view valid_AttesterSlashing or ProposerSlashing as invalid, due to rounding errors in large number values. This causes a consensus split, where Lodestar nodes are forked away from the main network. Similarly, Lodestar may consider invalid ProposerSlashing as valid, thus including in proposed blocks that will be considered invalid by the network. Version 0.36.0 contains a fix for this issue. As a workaround, use BigInt to represent Slot and Epoch values in AttesterSlashing and ProposerSlashing objects. BigInt is too slow to be used in all Slot and Epoch cases, so one may carefully use BigInt just where necessary for consensus.

CVE
#java

Impact

Possible consensus split given maliciously-crafted AttesterSlashing or ProposerSlashing being included on-chain.

Since we represent uint64 values as native javascript numbers, there is an issue when those variables with large (greater than 2^53) uint64 values are included on chain. In those cases, Lodestar may view valid AttesterSlashing or ProposerSlashing as invalid, due to rounding errors in large number values. This causes a consensus split, where Lodestar nodes are forked away from the main network.

Similarly Lodestar may consider invalid ProposerSlashing as valid, thus including in proposed blocks that will be considered invalid by the network.

Patches

#3977

Workarounds

Use BigInt to represent Slot and Epoch values in AttesterSlashing and ProposerSlashing objects. BigInt is too slow to be used in all Slot and Epoch cases, so we will carefully use BigInt just where necessary for consensus.

Related news

GHSA-cvj7-5f3c-9vg9: AttesterSlashing number overflow

### Impact Possible consensus split given maliciously-crafted `AttesterSlashing` or `ProposerSlashing` being included on-chain. Since we represent `uint64` values as native javascript `number`s, there is an issue when those variables with large (greater than 2^53) `uint64` values are included on chain. In those cases, Lodestar may view _valid_ `AttesterSlashing` or `ProposerSlashing` as _invalid_, due to rounding errors in large `number` values. This causes a consensus split, where Lodestar nodes are forked away from the main network. Similarly Lodestar may consider _invalid_ `ProposerSlashing` as _valid_, thus including in proposed blocks that will be considered invalid by the network. ### Patches https://github.com/ChainSafe/lodestar/pull/3977 ### Workarounds Use `BigInt` to represent `Slot` and `Epoch` values in `AttesterSlashing` and `ProposerSlashing` objects. `BigInt` is too slow to be used in all `Slot` and `Epoch` cases, so we will carefully use `BigInt` just where neces...

CVE: Latest News

CVE-2023-50976: Transactions API Authorization by oleiman · Pull Request #14969 · redpanda-data/redpanda
CVE-2023-6905
CVE-2023-6903
CVE-2023-6904
CVE-2023-3907