Security Resilience

CVE-2023-34449

Parity Ink\! 4.0.0 – 4.2.1

Public PoC
Published
14 June 2023
Modified
21 November 2024
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 5.3
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N
EPSS Score 0.0097 61th percentile
Risk Priority 46 floored blend · peak EPSS

CVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.

Summary

CVE-2023-34449 is a medium-severity Incorrect Check of Function Return Value (CWE-253) vulnerability in Parity Ink\!. Its CVSS base score is 5.3 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Junk Data (T1001.001); ranked in the top 39% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

ink! is an embedded domain specific language to write smart contracts in Rust for blockchains built on the Substrate framework. Starting in version 4.0.0 and prior to version 4.2.1, the return value when using delegate call mechanics, either through `CallBuilder::delegate`…

more

or `ink_env::invoke_contract_delegate`, is decoded incorrectly. This bug was related to the mechanics around decoding a call's return buffer, which was changed as part of pull request 1450. Since this feature was only released in ink! 4.0.0, no previous versions are affected. Users who have an ink! 4.x series contract should upgrade to 4.2.1 to receive a patch.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1001.001 Junk Data Command And Control
Adversaries may add junk data to protocols used for command and control to make detection more difficult.
T1001.003 Protocol or Service Impersonation Command And Control
Adversaries may impersonate legitimate protocols or web service traffic to disguise command and control activity and thwart analysis efforts.
T1003.008 /etc/passwd and /etc/shadow Credential Access
Adversaries may attempt to dump the contents of <code>/etc/passwd</code> and <code>/etc/shadow</code> to enable offline password cracking.
T1005 Data from Local System Collection
Adversaries may search local system sources, such as file systems, configuration files, local databases, virtual machine files, or process memory, to find files of interest and sensitive data prior to Exfiltration.
T1007 System Service Discovery Discovery
Adversaries may try to gather information about registered local system services.
T1021 Remote Services Lateral Movement
Adversaries may use [Valid Accounts](https://attack.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2023-45130Same vendor: Parity
CVE-2023-28431Same vendor: Parity
CVE-2024-1622Shared CWE-253, CWE-754
CVE-2023-49286Shared CWE-253, CWE-754
CVE-2026-33774Shared CWE-754
CVE-2024-39519Shared CWE-754
CVE-2025-62875Shared CWE-754
CVE-2024-42284Shared CWE-754
CVE-2025-60004Shared CWE-754
CVE-2024-39559Shared CWE-754

Affected Assets

parity
ink\!
4.0.0 — 4.2.1

Mitigating Controls

Likely Mitigating Controls AI

Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.

addresses: CWE-754

Requires detection and response to audit logging failures as an unusual or exceptional condition.

addresses: CWE-754

Implements detection of unusual or exceptional conditions followed by safe mode entry, reducing the window for exploitation of unchecked conditions.

addresses: CWE-754

Training ensures users perform required checks for unusual or exceptional conditions as part of contingency roles, limiting attacker leverage from skipped validations.

addresses: CWE-754

IR testing directly validates checks for unusual or exceptional conditions that could indicate security incidents.

addresses: CWE-754

Requires ongoing monitoring of organization-defined metrics and analysis, enabling checks for unusual or exceptional conditions.

addresses: CWE-754

Security testing routinely checks for unusual or exceptional inputs/conditions, identifying missing validation steps that flaw remediation then resolves.

addresses: CWE-754

Requires detection of unusual conditions followed by a controlled transition to the defined failure state.

addresses: CWE-754

MTTF determination forces explicit checks for conditions that precede predictable component failure.

Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

PR.PS-06 partial match
blocks

Secure SDLC practices directly enforce proper error-handling and return-value checking during development.

Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

A.8.15 Logging partial match
finds

Logging can record unhandled exceptions but does not prevent the weakness itself.

finds

Monitoring may detect symptoms of unhandled conditions but does not eliminate the root weakness.

blocks

Secure SDLC mandates return-value checks and error handling, directly reducing CWE-253.

blocks

A.8.26 requires that security requirements (including input validation, resilience against injections, output controls, error handling, etc.) be identified and specified during development or acquisition; it does not itself enforce, implement or assure correct checking of function return values and therefore does not stop exploitation of CWE-253 defects that remain present.

blocks

A.8.27 establishes and applies secure engineering principles (e.g. least privilege, security by design, distrust external input, fail securely) and requires design reviews against known attack patterns; CWE-253 is a specific code-level implementation error in checking function returns that these principles and reviews do not stop from being introduced or exploited.

Hardening callouts derived

DISA STIG baselines are authored against specific weaknesses. Where this CVE cites a broad weakness class, the mapping is not asserted at that abstraction (owner ruling, 2026-09-25: grade only at Base and below), so no rule is shown here rather than a rule shown against the wrong grain.

  • No fine-grained STIG row for CWE-754, a class-level weakness. Rules are authored against its narrower children: CWE-354.

References