7.5
CWE
662
Advisory Published
Advisory Published
Updated

CVE-2025-27104: double eval in For List Iter in Vyper

First published: Fri Feb 21 2025(Updated: )

Multiple evaluation of a single expression is possible in the iterator target of a for loop. While the iterator expression cannot produce multiple writes, it can consume side effects produced in the loop body (e.g. read a storage variable updated in the loop body) and thus lead to unexpected program behavior. Specifically, reads in iterators which contain an ifexp (e.g. `for s: uint256 in ([read(), read()] if True else [])`) may interleave reads with writes in the loop body. The fix is tracked in https://github.com/vyperlang/vyper/pull/4488. ### Vulnerability Details Vyper for loops allow two kinds of iterator targets, namely the `range()` builtin and an iterable type, like SArray and DArray. During codegen, iterable lists are required to not produce any side-effects (in the following code, `range_scope` forces `iter_list` to be parsed in a constant context, which is checked against `is_constant`). ```python def _parse_For_list(self): with self.context.range_scope(): iter_list = Expr(self.stmt.iter, self.context).ir_node ... def range_scope(self): prev_value = self.in_range_expr self.in_range_expr = True yield self.in_range_expr = prev_value def is_constant(self): return self.constancy is Constancy.Constant or self.in_range_expr ``` However, this does not prevent the iterator from consuming side effects provided by the body of the loop. For dynamic arrays, the compiler simply panics: ```vyper x: DynArray[uint256, 3] @external def test(): for i: uint256 in (self.usesideeffect() if True else self.usesideeffect()): pass @view def usesideeffect() -> DynArray[uint256, 3]: return self.x ``` For SArrays on the other hand, `iter_list` is instantiated in the body of a `repeat` ir, so it can be evaluated several times. Here are three illustrating examples. In the first example, the following test case pre-evaluates the iter list and stores the result to a temporary list in memory. So the list is only evaluated once, before entry into the loop body, and the log output will be 0, 0, 0. ```vyper event I: i: uint256 x: uint256 @deploy def __init__(): self.x = 0 @external def test(): for i: uint256 in [self.usesideeffect(), self.usesideeffect(), self.usesideeffect()]: self.x += 1 log I(i) @view def usesideeffect() -> uint256: return self.x ``` However, in the next two examples, because the iterator target is not a list literal, it will be evaluated in the loop body. In the second example, `iter_list` is an ifexp, thus it will be evaluated lazily in the loop body. The log output will be 0, 1, 2 due to consumption of side effects. ```vyper event I: i: uint256 x: uint256 @deploy def __init__(): self.x = 0 @external def test(): for i: uint256 in ([self.usesideeffect(), self.usesideeffect(), self.usesideeffect()] if True else self.otherclause()): self.x += 1 log I(i) @view def usesideeffect() -> uint256: return self.x @view def otherclause() -> uint256[3]: return [0, 0, 0] ``` In the third example, `iter_list` is also an ifexp, thus it will only be evaluated in the loop body. The log output will be 0, 1, 2 due to consumption of side effects. ```vyper event I: i: uint256 x: uint256[3] @deploy def __init__(): self.x = [0, 0, 0] @external def test(): for i: uint256 in (self.usesideeffect() if True else self.otherclause()): self.x[0] += 1 self.x[1] += 1 self.x[2] += 1 log I(i) @view def usesideeffect() -> uint256[3]: return self.x @view def otherclause() -> uint256[3]: return [0, 0, 0] ```

Credit: security-advisories@github.com

Affected SoftwareAffected VersionHow to fix
pip/vyper<=0.4.0
0.4.1

Never miss a vulnerability like this again

Sign up to SecAlerts for real-time vulnerability data matched to your software, aggregated from hundreds of sources.

Frequently Asked Questions

  • What is the severity of CVE-2025-27104?

    CVE-2025-27104 is considered a moderate severity vulnerability due to potential unintended side effects in loop iteration.

  • How do I fix CVE-2025-27104?

    To fix CVE-2025-27104, upgrade the vyper package to version 0.4.1 or later.

  • What software is affected by CVE-2025-27104?

    CVE-2025-27104 affects the vyper package versions up to and including 0.4.0.

  • What can happen if CVE-2025-27104 is exploited?

    Exploitation of CVE-2025-27104 may lead to unexpected behavior in smart contracts due to multiple evaluations of loop expressions.

  • Is there a workaround for CVE-2025-27104?

    Currently, the only reliable workaround for CVE-2025-27104 is to update to a fixed version of the vyper package.

Contact

SecAlerts Pty Ltd.
132 Wickham Terrace
Fortitude Valley,
QLD 4006, Australia
info@secalerts.co
By using SecAlerts services, you agree to our services end-user license agreement. This website is safeguarded by reCAPTCHA and governed by the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service. All names, logos, and brands of products are owned by their respective owners, and any usage of these names, logos, and brands for identification purposes only does not imply endorsement. If you possess any content that requires removal, please get in touch with us.
© 2025 SecAlerts Pty Ltd.
ABN: 70 645 966 203, ACN: 645 966 203