SOC status:Duty analyst on shift

UK Cyber Defence
VulnerabilityModified

CVE-2022-29219

Prior to version 0.36.0, there is a possible consensus split given maliciously-crafted `AttesterSlashing` or `ProposerSlashing` being included on-chain.

HIGH 7.5EPSS 1.29%

Does this matter?

High impact if exploited, but EPSS currently rates exploitation as unlikely (1.29%). Schedule it in the normal patch cycle and watch for a rise in EPSS or a public exploit.

Description

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 `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. 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.

CVSS 3.1
7.5 HIGHCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
EPSS
1.29% probability · 69th percentile
CISA KEV
Not listed
Weakness
CWE-190
Affected
chainsafe/lodestar
Source
security-advisories@github.com

Source: NVD record, EPSS from FIRST.org, KEV from CISA. Refreshed daily.