CVE-2023-30629: Vyper Incorrect Success Value Returned Vulnerability

HIGH
Advisory Identifier: GHSA-w9g2-3w7p-72g9
CVSS 7.5
CWE-670
Published
Advisory Summary

CVE-2023-30629 is a HIGH (CVSS 7.5) incorrect success value returned vulnerability (CWE-670: Always-Incorrect Control Flow Implementation) affecting Vyper libraries in the PyPI ecosystem. The issue involves incorrect success value returned in vyper. Remediation is available by upgrading affected packages to version 0.3.8.

CVE-2023-30629 at a Glance

CVE Identifier CVE-2023-30629
GHSA Identifier GHSA-w9g2-3w7p-72g9
Severity HIGH
CVSS v3.1 Base Score 7.5
CWE Classification CWE-670: Always-Incorrect Control Flow Implementation
Affected Product Vyper
Package Ecosystem PyPI
Published Date
Last Updated

Security Impact

CVSS: 7.5

The security impact metrics below are parsed directly from the CVSS v3.1 vector string (CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N).

Attack Vector Network (AV:N)
Attack Complexity Low (AC:L)
Privileges Required None (PR:N)
User Interaction None (UI:N)
Scope Unchanged (S:U)
Confidentiality None (C:N)
Integrity High (I:H)
Availability None (A:N)

How to Fix CVE-2023-30629

To remediate this vulnerability, upgrade all affected Vyper dependencies to a patched release. Both direct and transitive dependencies should be checked, as frameworks or security libraries may pull in vulnerable versions transitively.

vyper fixed: 0.3.8
pip install vyper>=0.3.8
Verify Direct and Transitive Dependencies

Run the following command in your project directory to verify that all resolved dependencies use the patched release:

pip show vyper

How to Check if You Are Affected

To determine whether your Python environment is affected by CVE-2023-30629, inspect your installed packages using pip:

pip show vyper

Analyze the terminal output to locate any version of Vyper in your dependency tree. If any resolved version matches the vulnerable ranges listed in the table below (for example, versions earlier than 0.3.8), your application is affected.

Note: The pip show vyper command checks currently installed packages in your active Python environment.

Technical Details

Vulnerability Mechanism & Technical Analysis

This vulnerability is classified under CWE-670: Always-Incorrect Control Flow Implementation, where the code contains a control flow path that does not reflect the algorithm that the path is intended to implement, leading to incorrect behavior any time this path is navigated. In Vyper, software state validation or input boundaries are circumvented during processing. Review the official source advisory statement below for specific affected components, classes, and reproduction details.

Source Advisory Statement

### Background During the audit of [Lido's Gate Seals](https://github.com/lidofinance/gate-seals) code [statemind](https://statemind.io) team identified a weird behavior of the code that uses `raw_call`: https://github.com/lidofinance/gate-seals/blob/051593e74df01a4131c485b4fda52e691cd4b7d8/contracts/GateSeal.vy#L164 . Construction like this: ```vyper success = raw_call( sealable, _abi_encode(SEAL_DURATION_SECONDS, method_id=method_id("pauseFor(uint256)")), revert_on_failure=False ) ``` was not fully documented: https://docs.vyperlang.org/en/v0.3.7/built-in-functions.html#raw_call . The documentation says that: if `max_outsize=0` it should return nothing and then it says that if `revert_on_failure=False` it should return a `success` flag in the tuple of response, but what if `max_outsize=0` and `revert_on_failure=False`. <img width="715" alt="image" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/22330612/232125364-d2b3bbac-0b4f-40cb-80ff-f55d8eafef44.png"> So the team started researching what exactly happened in that case, after some research we found that the Vyper compiler generates the wrong bytecode in that case, it generates the sequence: ``` CALL // call MLOAD // MLOAD is wrong since the CALL result is already stored in the stack ``` ### Impact Example of buggy code: ```vyper @external def returnSome(calling: address, a: uint256) -> bool: success: bool = false success = raw_call( calling, _abi_encode(a, method_id=method_id("a(uint256)")), revert_on_failure=False ) ``` any contract that uses the `raw_call` with `revert_on_failure=False` and `max_outsize=0` receives the wrong response from `raw_call`. Depending on the memory garbage, the result can be either `True` or `False`. ### Patches Fix by @charles-cooper https://github.com/vyperlang/vyper/commit/851f7a1b3aa2a36fd041e3d0ed38f9355a58c8ae ### Workarounds The simple workaround is always to put `max_outsize>0`. Workaround example https://github.com/lidofinance/gate-seals/pull/5/files ### References Lido's fix: https://github.com/lidofinance/gate-seals/pull/5/files

CVE-2023-30629 Affected Vyper Versions

1 component(s)
Fixed Versions:
0.3.8
Product / Package Ecosystem Affected Versions Fixed Version
vyper
PyPI
≥ 0.3.1
< 0.3.8
0.3.8

References

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CVE-2023-30629?
CVE-2023-30629 is a security vulnerability in Vyper involving Incorrect success value returned in vyper under CWE-670: Always-Incorrect Control Flow Implementation.
Which Vyper versions are affected?
Affected versions include releases prior to 0.3.8 across affected packages: vyper.
What version fixes CVE-2023-30629?
Upgrading to 0.3.8 (or the latest patched release for your respective branch) resolves the vulnerability.
Is vyper affected?
Yes, vyper is affected in releases prior to 0.3.8. Upgrade your dependency to 0.3.8 or later.
What is the CVSS score of CVE-2023-30629?
CVE-2023-30629 has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.5 (HIGH) with vector string CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N.
What CWE is associated with CVE-2023-30629?
CVE-2023-30629 is classified under CWE-670: Always-Incorrect Control Flow Implementation (The code contains a control flow path that does not reflect the algorithm that the path is intended to implement, leading to incorrect behavior any time this path is navigated.).
How can I check PyPI dependencies for CVE-2023-30629?
Run the dependency tree command: 'pip show vyper'. This command lists direct and transitive dependencies in your build configuration so you can verify if a vulnerable version is resolved.
Machine-readable OSV JSON OSV v1.5 Schema
Normalized schema output
{
  "schema_version" : "1.4.0",
  "id" : "GHSA-w9g2-3w7p-72g9",
  "modified" : "2024-11-19T16:31:34Z",
  "published" : "2023-04-24T22:33:52Z",
  "aliases" : [ "CVE-2023-30629" ],
  "summary" : "Incorrect success value returned in vyper",
  "details" : "### Background\nDuring the audit of [Lido's Gate Seals](https://github.com/lidofinance/gate-seals) code [statemind](https://statemind.io) team identified a weird behavior of the code that uses `raw_call`: https://github.com/lidofinance/gate-seals/blob/051593e74df01a4131c485b4fda52e691cd4b7d8/contracts/GateSeal.vy#L164 .\n\nConstruction like this:\n```vyper\nsuccess = raw_call(\n    sealable,\n    _abi_encode(SEAL_DURATION_SECONDS, method_id=method_id(\"pauseFor(uint256)\")),\n    revert_on_failure=False\n)\n```\nwas not fully documented: https://docs.vyperlang.org/en/v0.3.7/built-in-functions.html#raw_call .\n\nThe documentation says that: if `max_outsize=0` it should return nothing and then it says that if `revert_on_failure=False` it should return a `success` flag in the tuple of response, but what if `max_outsize=0`  and `revert_on_failure=False`.\n\n<img width=\"715\" alt=\"image\" src=\"https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/22330612/232125364-d2b3bbac-0b4f-40cb-80ff-f55d8eafef44.png\">\n\n So the team started researching what exactly happened in that case, after some research we found that the Vyper compiler generates the wrong bytecode in that case, it generates the sequence:\n```\nCALL // call\nMLOAD // MLOAD is wrong since the CALL result is already stored in the stack\n```\n\n### Impact\nExample of buggy code:\n```vyper\n@external\ndef returnSome(calling: address, a: uint256) -> bool:\n    success: bool = false\n    success = raw_call(\n        calling,\n        _abi_encode(a, method_id=method_id(\"a(uint256)\")),\n        revert_on_failure=False\n        )\n```\n\nany contract that uses the `raw_call` with `revert_on_failure=False` and `max_outsize=0` receives the wrong response from `raw_call`. Depending on the memory garbage, the result can be either `True` or `False`.\n\n### Patches\nFix by @charles-cooper https://github.com/vyperlang/vyper/commit/851f7a1b3aa2a36fd041e3d0ed38f9355a58c8ae\n\n### Workarounds\nThe simple workaround is always to put  `max_outsize>0`.\nWorkaround example https://github.com/lidofinance/gate-seals/pull/5/files\n\n### References\nLido's fix: https://github.com/lidofinance/gate-seals/pull/5/files\n",
  "severity" : [ {
    "type" : "CVSS_V3",
    "score" : "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N"
  }, {
    "type" : "CVSS_V4",
    "score" : "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N"
  } ],
  "affected" : [ {
    "package" : {
      "ecosystem" : "PyPI",
      "name" : "vyper"
    },
    "ranges" : [ {
      "type" : "ECOSYSTEM",
      "events" : [ {
        "introduced" : "0.3.1"
      }, {
        "fixed" : "0.3.8"
      } ]
    } ]
  } ],
  "references" : [ {
    "type" : "WEB",
    "url" : "https://github.com/vyperlang/vyper/security/advisories/GHSA-w9g2-3w7p-72g9"
  }, {
    "type" : "ADVISORY",
    "url" : "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-30629"
  }, {
    "type" : "WEB",
    "url" : "https://github.com/lidofinance/gate-seals/pull/5/files"
  }, {
    "type" : "WEB",
    "url" : "https://github.com/vyperlang/vyper/commit/851f7a1b3aa2a36fd041e3d0ed38f9355a58c8ae"
  }, {
    "type" : "WEB",
    "url" : "https://docs.vyperlang.org/en/v0.3.7/built-in-functions.html#raw_call"
  }, {
    "type" : "WEB",
    "url" : "https://github.com/lidofinance/gate-seals/blob/051593e74df01a4131c485b4fda52e691cd4b7d8/contracts/GateSeal.vy#L164"
  }, {
    "type" : "WEB",
    "url" : "https://github.com/pypa/advisory-database/tree/main/vulns/vyper/PYSEC-2023-131.yaml"
  }, {
    "type" : "PACKAGE",
    "url" : "https://github.com/vyperlang/vyper"
  } ],
  "database_specific" : {
    "cwe_ids" : [ "CWE-670" ],
    "severity" : "HIGH",
    "github_reviewed" : true,
    "github_reviewed_at" : "2023-04-24T22:33:52Z",
    "nvd_published_at" : "2023-04-24T22:15:10Z"
  }
}