Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-33471

Memory Safety in Nimiq Proof-Of-Stake ≤ 1.3.0

Published
22 April 2026
Modified
24 April 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 9.6
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0022 12th percentile
Risk Priority 64 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2026-33471 is a critical-severity Improper Input Validation (CWE-20) vulnerability in Nimiq Nimiq Proof-Of-Stake. Its CVSS base score is 9.6 (Critical).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Mark-of-the-Web Bypass (T1553.005); ranked at the 12th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SC-23 (Session Authenticity) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary

Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.

CVE-2026-33471 is a vulnerability in the nimiq-block library, which contains block primitives for Nimiq's Rust implementation, specifically within the core-rs-albatross repository. The issue lies in the `SkipBlockProof::verify` function, which computes its quorum check using `BitSet.len()` before iterating over `BitSet` indices and casting each `usize` index to `u16` (`slot as u16`) for slot lookup. Prior to version 1.3.0, an attacker can supply a `SkipBlockProof` where `MultiSignature.signers` includes out-of-range indices spaced by 65536; these indices inflate the `len()` value but collide onto the same in-range `u16` slot during aggregation.

A malicious validator with low privileges (PR:L) can exploit this over the network (AV:N) with low complexity (AC:L) and no user interaction (UI:N). By crafting such a proof, the attacker can pass skip block proof verification using far fewer than the required `2f+1` real signer slots, simply by multiplying a single BLS signature by the collision factor. This results in high impacts to integrity (I:H) and availability (A:H) with changed scope (S:C), earning a CVSS v3.1 score of 9.6. Associated CWEs include CWE-20 (Improper Input Validation), CWE-190 (Integer Overflow or Wraparound), CWE-345 (Insufficient Verification of Data Authenticity), and CWE-1284 (Immutable Public Assets Without Hashing).

The patch addressing this vulnerability is included in core-rs-albatross version 1.3.0, as shown in the fix commit and release tag. The GitHub security advisory (GHSA-6973-8887-87ff) documents the issue, and no known workarounds are available.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

nimiq-block contains block primitives to be used in Nimiq's Rust implementation. `SkipBlockProof::verify` computes its quorum check using `BitSet.len()`, then iterates `BitSet` indices and casts each `usize` index to `u16` (`slot as u16`) for slot lookup. Prior to version 1.3.0, if…

more

an attacker can get a `SkipBlockProof` verified where `MultiSignature.signers` contains out-of-range indices spaced by 65536, these indices inflate `len()` but collide onto the same in-range `u16` slot during aggregation. This makes it possible for a malicious validator with far fewer than `2f+1` real signer slots to pass skip block proof verification by multiplying a single BLS signature by the same factor. The patch for this vulnerability is included as part of v1.3.0. No known workarounds are available.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1553.005 Mark-of-the-Web Bypass Defense Impairment
Adversaries may abuse specific file formats to subvert Mark-of-the-Web (MOTW) controls.
T1068 Exploitation for Privilege Escalation Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to elevate privileges.
T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Access
Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network.
T1195 Supply Chain Compromise Initial Access
Adversaries may manipulate products or product delivery mechanisms prior to receipt by a final consumer for the purpose of data or system compromise.
T1195.001 Compromise Software Dependencies and Development Tools Initial Access
Adversaries may manipulate software dependencies and development tools prior to receipt by a final consumer for the purpose of data or system compromise.
T1195.002 Compromise Software Supply Chain Initial Access
Adversaries may manipulate application software prior to receipt by a final consumer for the purpose of data or system compromise.
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-40093Same product: Nimiq Nimiq Proof-Of-Stake
CVE-2026-34066Same product: Nimiq Nimiq Proof-Of-Stake
CVE-2026-59930Shared CWE-1284, CWE-345
CVE-2024-7980Shared CWE-20, CWE-345
CVE-2024-3173Shared CWE-20, CWE-345
CVE-2025-24882Shared CWE-20, CWE-345
CVE-2026-33729Shared CWE-20, CWE-345
CVE-2025-66225Shared CWE-20, CWE-345
CVE-2026-45055Shared CWE-20, CWE-345
CVE-2023-30559Shared CWE-20, CWE-345

Affected Assets

nimiq
nimiq proof-of-stake
≤ 1.3.0

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)
  • 14 hardening rules · 5 OS baselines
Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V6.7.2
  • V1.4.2
  • V2.1.1
  • V2.2.1

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Explicit requirement to protect session authenticity structurally prevents the weakness for communications.

Developer testing and evaluation can discover missing input validation through analysis or test cases.

SI-10 directly requires validity checks on information inputs, structurally preventing improper or missing validation.

Integrity verification tools detect (but do not stop) the acceptance of data lacking authenticity.

Requiring documented development standards and tools can embed input-validation practices into the engineering process.

Secure engineering principles require use of safe arithmetic constructs or language features that structurally eliminate integer overflow during calculation.

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 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly require and enforce input validation during development.

RC.RP-05 mostly match
degrades

CWE-345 directly impairs RC.RP-05's verification of restored-asset integrity/authenticity, largely defeating the outcome while still leaving other restoration-confirmation steps partially viable.

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.

finds

Testing against a defined set of requirements and using code review plus vulnerability scanning forces validation of inputs and handling of unanticipated conditions, reducing the chance that malformed data will be accepted.

mitigates

Network controls can enforce authenticated channels, reducing risk of accepting unauthentic data.

mitigates

Secure network services often include authenticity checks for data exchanged over those services.

prevents

Cryptographic mechanisms directly verify data origin and integrity, preventing acceptance of unauthentic data.

prevents

Secure-coding guidelines and mandatory security testing (including code scans) compel developers to validate and sanitize inputs at design and implementation time, lowering the incidence of malformed or malicious data reaching downstream components.

prevents

Mandating input controls that include integrity checks and input validation ensures that untrusted data is examined before use, blocking the root cause of many injection and malformed-data weaknesses.

Hardening callouts derived

Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).

Oracle Linux 8 (2 rules)
  • V-248574 YUM must be configured to prevent the installation of patches, service packs, device drivers, or OL 8 system components that have not been digitally signed using a certificate that is recognized and approved by the organization. prevents CWE-345
  • V-248575 OL 8 must prevent the installation of software, patches, service packs, device drivers, or operating system components of local packages without verification they have been digitally signed using a certificate that is issued by a Certificate Authority (CA) that is recognized and approved by the organization. prevents CWE-345
Oracle Linux 9 (1 rule)
  • V-271525 OL 9 must have GPG signature verification enabled for all software repositories. prevents CWE-345
RHEL 7 (2 rules)
  • V-204447 The Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system must prevent the installation of software, patches, service packs, device drivers, or operating system components from a repository without verification they have been digitally signed using a certificate that is issued by a Certificate Authority (CA) that is recognized and approved by the organization. prevents CWE-345
  • V-204448 The Red Hat Enterprise Linux operating system must prevent the installation of software, patches, service packs, device drivers, or operating system components of local packages without verification they have been digitally signed using a certificate that is issued by a Certificate Authority (CA) that is recognized and approved by the organization. prevents CWE-345
RHEL 8 (2 rules)
  • V-230264 RHEL 8 must prevent the installation of software, patches, service packs, device drivers, or operating system components from a repository without verification they have been digitally signed using a certificate that is issued by a Certificate Authority (CA) that is recognized and approved by the organization. prevents CWE-345
  • V-230265 RHEL 8 must prevent the installation of software, patches, service packs, device drivers, or operating system components of local packages without verification they have been digitally signed using a certificate that is issued by a Certificate Authority (CA) that is recognized and approved by the organization. prevents CWE-20, CWE-345
RHEL 9 (1 rule)
  • V-257822 RHEL 9 must have GPG signature verification enabled for all software repositories. prevents CWE-345

References