PYSEC-2024-208

Vulnerability from pysec - Published: 2024-04-25 18:15 - Updated: 2025-01-19 19:19
VLAI?
Details

Vyper is a pythonic Smart Contract Language for the Ethereum virtual machine. In versions 0.3.10 and prior, using the create_from_blueprint builtin can result in a double eval vulnerability when raw_args=True and the args argument has side-effects. It can be seen that the _build_create_IR function of the create_from_blueprint builtin doesn't cache the mentioned args argument to the stack. As such, it can be evaluated multiple times (instead of retrieving the value from the stack). No vulnerable production contracts were found. Additionally, double evaluation of side-effects should be easily discoverable in client tests. As such, the impact is low. As of time of publication, no fixed versions exist.

Severity ?
5.3 (Medium)
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
Impacted products
Name purl
vyper pkg:pypi/vyper
Aliases
To clipboard 

{
  "affected": [
    {
      "package": {
        "ecosystem": "PyPI",
        "name": "vyper",
        "purl": "pkg:pypi/vyper"
      },
      "ranges": [
        {
          "events": [
            {
              "introduced": "0"
            },
            {
              "fixed": "0.4.0"
            }
          ],
          "type": "ECOSYSTEM"
        }
      ],
      "versions": [
        "0.1.0b1",
        "0.1.0b10",
        "0.1.0b11",
        "0.1.0b12",
        "0.1.0b13",
        "0.1.0b14",
        "0.1.0b15",
        "0.1.0b16",
        "0.1.0b17",
        "0.1.0b2",
        "0.1.0b3",
        "0.1.0b4",
        "0.1.0b5",
        "0.1.0b6",
        "0.1.0b7",
        "0.1.0b8",
        "0.1.0b9",
        "0.2.1",
        "0.2.10",
        "0.2.11",
        "0.2.12",
        "0.2.13",
        "0.2.14",
        "0.2.15",
        "0.2.16",
        "0.2.2",
        "0.2.3",
        "0.2.4",
        "0.2.5",
        "0.2.6",
        "0.2.7",
        "0.2.8",
        "0.2.9",
        "0.3.0",
        "0.3.1",
        "0.3.10",
        "0.3.10rc1",
        "0.3.10rc2",
        "0.3.10rc3",
        "0.3.10rc4",
        "0.3.10rc5",
        "0.3.2",
        "0.3.3",
        "0.3.4",
        "0.3.5",
        "0.3.6",
        "0.3.7",
        "0.3.8",
        "0.3.9",
        "0.4.0b1",
        "0.4.0b2",
        "0.4.0b3",
        "0.4.0b4",
        "0.4.0b5",
        "0.4.0b6",
        "0.4.0rc1",
        "0.4.0rc2",
        "0.4.0rc3",
        "0.4.0rc4",
        "0.4.0rc5",
        "0.4.0rc6"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2024-32647"
  ],
  "details": "Vyper is a pythonic Smart Contract Language for the Ethereum virtual machine. In versions 0.3.10 and prior, using the `create_from_blueprint` builtin can result in a double eval vulnerability when `raw_args=True` and the `args` argument has side-effects. It can be seen that the `_build_create_IR` function of the `create_from_blueprint` builtin doesn\u0027t cache the mentioned `args` argument to the stack. As such, it can be evaluated multiple times (instead of retrieving the value from the stack). No vulnerable production contracts were found. Additionally, double evaluation of side-effects should be easily discoverable in client tests. As such, the impact is low. As of time of publication, no fixed versions exist.\n",
  "id": "PYSEC-2024-208",
  "modified": "2025-01-19T19:19:01.647736+00:00",
  "published": "2024-04-25T18:15:08+00:00",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://github.com/vyperlang/vyper/security/advisories/GHSA-3whq-64q2-qfj6"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://github.com/vyperlang/vyper/blob/cedf7087e68e67c7bfbd47ae95dcb16b81ad2e02/vyper/builtins/functions.py#L1847"
    }
  ],
  "related": [
    "GHSA-3whq-64q2-qfj6",
    "GHSA-3whq-64q2-qfj6"
  ],
  "severity": [
    {
      "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N",
      "type": "CVSS_V3"
    }
  ]
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.




Sightings

Author Source Type Date

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.



Detection rules are retrieved from Rulezet.