CVE 6.9 MEDIUM

OpenZeppelin Contracts’s Bytes’s lastIndexOf function with position argument performs out-of-bound memory access on empty buffers_CVE-2025-54070

6.9 / 10
MEDIUM
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Description

OpenZeppelin Contracts is a library for secure smart contract development. Starting in version 5.2.0 and prior to version 5.4.0, the `lastIndexOf(bytes,byte,uint256)` function of the `Bytes.sol` library may access uninitialized memory when the following two conditions hold: 1) the provided buffer length is empty (i.e. `buffer.length == 0`) and position is not `2**256 - 1` (i.e. `pos != type(uint256).max`). The `pos` argument could be used to access arbitrary data outside of the buffer bounds. This could lead to the operation running out of gas, or returning an invalid index (outside of the empty buffer). Processing this invalid result for accessing the `buffer` would cause a revert under normal conditions. When triggered, the function reads memory at offset `buffer + 0x20 + pos`. If memory at that location (outside theΒ `buffer`) matches the search pattern, the function would return an out of bound index instead of the expected `type(uint256).max`. This creates unexpected behavior where callers receive a valid-looking index pointing outside buffer bounds. Subsequent memory accesses that don't check bounds and use the returned index must carefully review the potential impact depending on their setup. Code relying on this function returning `type(uint256).max` for empty buffers or using the returned index without bounds checking could exhibit undefined behavior. Users should upgrade to version 5.4.0 to receive a patch.

Basic Information

ID CVE-2025-54070
Source GitHub_M
Published Jul 17, 2025 at 18:25
Modified Jul 17, 2025 at 20:28

Affected Product

Vendor OpenZeppelin
Product openzeppelin-contracts
Version >= 5.2.0, < 5.4.0
Affected Versions OpenZeppelin openzeppelin-contracts >= 5.2.0, < 5.4.0

CWE Classification

References

πŸ’­ Join the Security Discussion

πŸ”’ Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

⚠️ Please be respectful and constructive in your comments. Security discussions should remain professional.