Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2023-42443 is a high-severity Out-of-bounds Write (CWE-787) vulnerability in Vyperlang Vyper. Its CVSS base score is 8.1 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 50th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-0275
Vulnerability Data
Vyper is a Pythonic Smart Contract Language for the Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM). In version 0.3.9 and prior, under certain conditions, the memory used by the builtins `raw_call`, `create_from_blueprint` and `create_copy_of` can be corrupted. For `raw_call`, the argument buffer of…
more
the call can be corrupted, leading to incorrect `calldata` in the sub-context. For `create_from_blueprint` and `create_copy_of`, the buffer for the to-be-deployed bytecode can be corrupted, leading to deploying incorrect bytecode. Each builtin has conditions that must be fulfilled for the corruption to happen. For `raw_call`, the `data` argument of the builtin must be `msg.data` and the `value` or `gas` passed to the builtin must be some complex expression that results in writing to the memory. For `create_copy_of`, the `value` or `salt` passed to the builtin must be some complex expression that results in writing to the memory. For `create_from_blueprint`, either no constructor parameters should be passed to the builtin or `raw_args` should be set to True, and the `value` or `salt` passed to the builtin must be some complex expression that results in writing to the memory. As of time of publication, no patched version exists. The issue is still being investigated, and there might be other cases where the corruption might happen. When the builtin is being called from an `internal` function `F`, the issue is not present provided that the function calling `F` wrote to memory before calling `F`. As a workaround, the complex expressions that are being passed as kwargs to the builtin should be cached in memory prior to the call to the builtin.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
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.
Out-of-bounds writes that corrupt control flow or inject shellcode are rendered non-executable by the same memory protections.
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.
Secure-development practices (static analysis, bounds checking, code review) are the primary means of preventing out-of-bounds writes.
Vulnerability scanning and recording can discover out-of-bounds write flaws so they can be remediated.
Patching or replacing vulnerable software directly eliminates known instances of this coding weakness.
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.
Security testing in development and acceptance can detect and prevent out-of-bounds write defects.
Secure development life cycle mandates practices that prevent out-of-bounds writes.
Application security requirements can specify bounds-checking and safe memory handling.
Secure architecture and engineering principles reduce the likelihood of buffer overflows.
Secure coding directly addresses out-of-bounds writes through language choice and coding standards.
Change management can enforce review gates that catch unsafe memory operations before deployment.