ghsa-f92v-grc2-w2fg
Vulnerability from github
Vulnerability Report
Impact
Smart contract applications that make use of the selfdestruct
functionality and their end-users.
Classification
The vulnerability has been classified as high
with a CVSS score of 8.2
. It has the potential to create a denial-of-service to all contracts that can invoke the selfdestruct
function to destroy a smart contract.
Users Impacted
Due to the successfully coordinated security vulnerability disclosure, no smart contracts were impacted through the use of this vulnerability. Smart contract states and storage values are not affected by this vulnerability. User funds and balances are safe.
Disclosure
In Ethermint running versions before v0.17.2
, the contract selfdestruct
invocation permanently removes the corresponding bytecode from the internal database storage. However, due to a bug in the DeleteAccount
function, all contracts that used the identical bytecode (i.e shared the same CodeHash
) will also stop working once one contract invokes selfdestruct
, even though the other contracts did not invoke the selfdestruct
OPCODE.
Additional Details
The same contract bytecode can be deployed multiple times to create multiple contract instances. In the internal database, the bytecode is stored as a key-value entry bytecode hash --> bytecode
which is shared by those contracts. Unfortunately, when one of the contracts invokes selfdestruct
, it will remove the corresponding bytecode hash -> bytecode
entry, and thus it disables all the contracts that share the same bytecode.
The attack scenario is as follows:
- The malicious attacker identifies a vulnerable contract that can invoke
selfdestruct
- The attacker deploys a copy of the contract with identical bytecode
- Finally, the attacker triggers the
selfdestruct
operation on their redeployed contract, actively causing a DoS on the original and vulnerable contract. All transactions will fail until a workaround is used (see below).
Patches
Has the problem been patched? What versions should users upgrade to?
This vulnerability has been patched in Ethermint versions ≥v0.18.0. The patch has state machine-breaking changes for applications using Ethermint so a coordinated upgrade procedure is required.
Details
The patch removes the bytecode deletion logic, i.e. contract bytecodes are never deleted from the internal database after the patch.
At the moment, Ethermint does not track how many times each bytecode is used, and thus it cannot determine if it is safe to delete a particular bytecode on selfdestruct
invocations. This behavior is the same with go-ethereum.
Workarounds
Is there a way for users to fix or remediate the vulnerability without upgrading?
If a contract is subject to DoS due to this issue, the user can redeploy the same contract, i.e with identical bytecode, so that the original contract's code is recovered.
The new contract deployment restores the bytecode hash -> bytecode
entry in the internal state.
References
Are there any links users can visit to find out more?
For more information
If you have any questions or comments about this advisory:
- Reach out to the Core Team in Discord
- Open a discussion in evmos/ethermint
- Email us at security@evmos.org for security questions
- For Press, email us at evmos@west-comms.com.
Credits
Thanks to the
- Cronos Team: @yihuang and @tomtau for discovering the issue, @gakuzen-crypto, @polycryptics, @FinnZhangCrypto, @wilson-ang, @brianatcrypto for the impact analysis.
- Evmos Team: @facs95 for patching the issue and @fedekunze for managing the release and coordinating between teams.
{ "affected": [ { "database_specific": { "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 0.17.2" }, "package": { "ecosystem": "Go", "name": "github.com/evmos/ethermint" }, "ranges": [ { "events": [ { "introduced": "0" }, { "fixed": "0.18.0" } ], "type": "ECOSYSTEM" } ] }, { "database_specific": { "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 6.0.3" }, "package": { "ecosystem": "Go", "name": "github.com/evmos/evmos" }, "ranges": [ { "events": [ { "introduced": "0" }, { "fixed": "7.0.0" } ], "type": "ECOSYSTEM" } ] }, { "database_specific": { "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 0.7.0" }, "package": { "ecosystem": "Go", "name": "github.com/crypto-org-chain/cronos" }, "ranges": [ { "events": [ { "introduced": "0" }, { "fixed": "0.7.1-rc2" } ], "type": "ECOSYSTEM" } ] }, { "database_specific": { "last_known_affected_version_range": "\u003c= 0.17.5" }, "package": { "ecosystem": "Go", "name": "github.com/Kava-Labs/kava" }, "ranges": [ { "events": [ { "introduced": "0" }, { "fixed": "0.18.0" } ], "type": "ECOSYSTEM" } ] } ], "aliases": [ "CVE-2022-35936" ], "database_specific": { "cwe_ids": [ "CWE-668" ], "github_reviewed": true, "github_reviewed_at": "2022-08-18T19:04:47Z", "nvd_published_at": "2022-08-05T13:15:00Z", "severity": "HIGH" }, "details": "# Vulnerability Report\n\n## Impact\n\nSmart contract applications that make use of the `selfdestruct` functionality and their end-users.\n\n## Classification\n\nThe vulnerability has been classified as `high` with a CVSS score of `8.2`. It has the potential to create a denial-of-service to all contracts that can invoke the [`selfdestruct`](https://ethereum.stackexchange.com/questions/315/why-are-selfdestructs-used-in-contract-programming#347) function to destroy a smart contract. \n\n## Users Impacted\n\nDue to the successfully coordinated security vulnerability disclosure, no smart contracts were impacted through the use of this vulnerability. Smart contract states and storage values are not affected by this vulnerability. User funds and balances are safe.\n\n## Disclosure\n\nIn Ethermint running versions before `v0.17.2`, the contract `selfdestruct` invocation permanently removes the corresponding bytecode from the internal database storage. However, due to a bug in the [`DeleteAccount`](https://github.com/evmos/ethermint/blob/c9d42d667b753147977a725e98ed116c933c76cb/x/evm/keeper/statedb.go#L199-L203) function, all contracts that used the identical bytecode (i.e shared the same `CodeHash`) will also stop working once one contract invokes `selfdestruct`, even though the other contracts did not invoke the `selfdestruct` OPCODE.\n\n### Additional Details\n\nThe same contract bytecode can be deployed multiple times to create multiple contract instances. In the internal database, the bytecode is stored as a key-value entry `bytecode hash --\u003e bytecode` which is shared by those contracts. Unfortunately, when one of the contracts invokes `selfdestruct`, it will remove the corresponding `bytecode hash -\u003e bytecode` entry, and thus it disables all the contracts that share the same bytecode.\n\nThe attack scenario is as follows:\n\n1. The malicious attacker identifies a vulnerable contract that can invoke `selfdestruct`\n2. The attacker deploys a copy of the contract with identical bytecode\n3. Finally, the attacker triggers the `selfdestruct` operation on their redeployed contract, actively causing a DoS on the original and vulnerable contract. All transactions will fail until a workaround is used (see below).\n\n## Patches\n\n*Has the problem been patched? What versions should users upgrade to?*\n\nThis vulnerability has been patched in Ethermint versions \u2265[v0.18.0](https://github.com/evmos/ethermint/releases/tag/v0.18.0). The patch has state machine-breaking changes for applications using Ethermint so a coordinated upgrade procedure is required.\n\n#### Details\n\nThe patch removes the bytecode deletion logic, i.e. contract bytecodes are never deleted from the internal database after the patch.\nAt the moment, Ethermint does not track how many times each bytecode is used, and thus it cannot determine if it is safe to delete a particular bytecode on `selfdestruct` invocations. This behavior is the same with go-ethereum.\n\n## Workarounds\n\n_Is there a way for users to fix or remediate the vulnerability without upgrading?_\n\nIf a contract is subject to DoS due to this issue, the user can redeploy the same contract, _i.e_ with identical bytecode, so that the original contract\u0027s code is recovered.\n\nThe new contract deployment restores the `bytecode hash -\u003e bytecode` entry in the internal state.\n\n## References\n\n*Are there any links users can visit to find out more?*\n\n### For more information\n\nIf you have any questions or comments about this advisory:\n\n- Reach out to the Core Team in [Discord](https://discord.gg/evmos)\n* Open a discussion in [evmos/ethermint](https://github.com/evmos/ethermint/discussions)\n* Email us at [security@evmos.org](mailto:security@evmos.org) for security questions\n* For Press, email us at [evmos@west-comms.com](mailto:evmos@west-comms.com).\n\n### Credits\n\nThanks to the \n\n- Cronos Team: @yihuang and @tomtau for discovering the issue, @gakuzen-crypto, @polycryptics, @FinnZhangCrypto, @wilson-ang, @brianatcrypto for the impact analysis.\n- Evmos Team: @facs95 for patching the issue and @fedekunze for managing the release and coordinating between teams.\n", "id": "GHSA-f92v-grc2-w2fg", "modified": "2022-08-18T19:04:47Z", "published": "2022-08-18T19:04:47Z", "references": [ { "type": "WEB", "url": "https://github.com/evmos/ethermint/security/advisories/GHSA-f92v-grc2-w2fg" }, { "type": "ADVISORY", "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-35936" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "https://github.com/evmos/ethermint/commit/144741832007a26dbe950512acbda4ed95b2a451" }, { "type": "PACKAGE", "url": "https://github.com/evmos/ethermint" }, { "type": "WEB", "url": "https://github.com/evmos/ethermint/blob/c9d42d667b753147977a725e98ed116c933c76cb/x/evm/keeper/statedb.go#L199-L203" } ], "schema_version": "1.4.0", "severity": [ { "score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:H", "type": "CVSS_V3" } ], "summary": "Ethermint vulnerable to DoS through unintended Contract Selfdestruct" }
Sightings
Author | Source | Type | Date |
---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
- Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.