CWE
129
Advisory Published
Updated

GHSA-52xq-j7v9-v4v2: Out-of-bounds Read

First published: Wed Feb 07 2024(Updated: )

### Summary Arrays can be keyed by a signed integer, while they are defined for unsigned integers only. The typechecker doesn't throw when spotting the usage of an `int` as an index for an array. Typically, negative integers are filtered out at runtime by the bounds checker, but small enough (i.e. large in magnitude, ex. `-2**255 + 5`) quantities combined with large enough arrays (at least `2**255` in length) can pass the bounds checker, resulting in unexpected behavior. A contract search was performed, and no production contracts were found to be impacted. ### Details The typechecker allows the usage of signed integers to be used as indexes to arrays. The vulnerability is present in different forms in all versions. Here is an example from `0.3.10`: https://github.com/vyperlang/vyper/blob/c150fc49ee9375a930d177044559b83cb95f7963/vyper/semantics/types/subscriptable.py#L127-L137 As can be seen, the validation is performed against `IntegerT.any()`. ### PoC If the array is sufficiently large, it can be indexed with a negative value: ```python arr: public(uint256[MAX_UINT256]) @external def set(idx: int256, num: uint256): self.arr[idx] = num ``` For signed integers, the 2's complement representation is used. Because the array was declared very large, the bounds checking will pass (negative values will simply be represented as very large numbers): https://github.com/vyperlang/vyper/blob/a1fd228cb9936c3e4bbca6f3ee3fb4426ef45490/vyper/codegen/core.py#L534-L541 ### Impact There are two potential vulnerability classes: unpredictable behavior and accessing inaccessible elements. 1. If it is possible to index an array with a negative integer without reverting, this is most likely not anticipated by the developer and such accesses can cause unpredictable behavior for the contract. 2. If a contract has an invariant in the form `assert index < x` where both `index` and `x` are signed integers, the developer might suppose that no elements on indexes `y | y >= x` are accessible. However, by using negative indexes this can be bypassed. The contract search found no production contracts impacted by these two classes of issues.

Affected SoftwareAffected VersionHow to fix
pip/vyper<=0.3.10

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.

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.
© 2024 SecAlerts Pty Ltd.
ABN: 70 645 966 203, ACN: 645 966 203