{"containers":{"cna":{"affected":[{"product":"lodestar","vendor":"ChainSafe","versions":[{"status":"affected","version":"< 0.36.0"}]}],"descriptions":[{"lang":"en","value":"Lodestar is a TypeScript implementation of the Ethereum Consensus specification. Prior to version 0.36.0, there is a possible consensus split given maliciously-crafted `AttesterSlashing` or `ProposerSlashing` being included on-chain. Because the developers represent `uint64` values as native javascript `number`s, there is an issue when those variables with large (greater than 2^53) `uint64` values are included on chain. In those cases, Lodestar may view valid_`AttesterSlashing` or `ProposerSlashing` as invalid, due to rounding errors in large `number` values. This causes a consensus split, where Lodestar nodes are forked away from the main network. Similarly, Lodestar may consider invalid `ProposerSlashing` as valid, thus including in proposed blocks that will be considered invalid by the network. Version 0.36.0 contains a fix for this issue. As a workaround, use `BigInt` to represent `Slot` and `Epoch` values in `AttesterSlashing` and `ProposerSlashing` objects. `BigInt` is too slow to be used in all `Slot` and `Epoch` cases, so one may carefully use `BigInt` just where necessary for consensus."}],"metrics":[{"cvssV3_1":{"attackComplexity":"LOW","attackVector":"NETWORK","availabilityImpact":"NONE","baseScore":7.5,"baseSeverity":"HIGH","confidentialityImpact":"NONE","integrityImpact":"HIGH","privilegesRequired":"NONE","scope":"UNCHANGED","userInteraction":"NONE","vectorString":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N","version":"3.1"}}],"problemTypes":[{"descriptions":[{"cweId":"CWE-190","description":"CWE-190: Integer Overflow or Wraparound","lang":"en","type":"CWE"}]}],"providerMetadata":{"dateUpdated":"2022-05-24T14:15:14.000Z","orgId":"a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa","shortName":"GitHub_M"},"references":[{"tags":["x_refsource_CONFIRM"],"url":"https://github.com/ChainSafe/lodestar/security/advisories/GHSA-cvj7-5f3c-9vg9"},{"tags":["x_refsource_MISC"],"url":"https://github.com/ChainSafe/lodestar/pull/3977"},{"tags":["x_refsource_MISC"],"url":"https://github.com/ChainSafe/lodestar/releases/tag/v0.36.0"}],"source":{"advisory":"GHSA-cvj7-5f3c-9vg9","discovery":"UNKNOWN"},"title":"Integer Overflow in Lodestar","x_legacyV4Record":{"CVE_data_meta":{"ASSIGNER":"security-advisories@github.com","ID":"CVE-2022-29219","STATE":"PUBLIC","TITLE":"Integer Overflow in Lodestar"},"affects":{"vendor":{"vendor_data":[{"product":{"product_data":[{"product_name":"lodestar","version":{"version_data":[{"version_value":"< 0.36.0"}]}}]},"vendor_name":"ChainSafe"}]}},"data_format":"MITRE","data_type":"CVE","data_version":"4.0","description":{"description_data":[{"lang":"eng","value":"Lodestar is a TypeScript implementation of the Ethereum Consensus specification. Prior to version 0.36.0, there is a possible consensus split given maliciously-crafted `AttesterSlashing` or `ProposerSlashing` being included on-chain. Because the developers represent `uint64` values as native javascript `number`s, there is an issue when those variables with large (greater than 2^53) `uint64` values are included on chain. In those cases, Lodestar may view valid_`AttesterSlashing` or `ProposerSlashing` as invalid, due to rounding errors in large `number` values. This causes a consensus split, where Lodestar nodes are forked away from the main network. Similarly, Lodestar may consider invalid `ProposerSlashing` as valid, thus including in proposed blocks that will be considered invalid by the network. Version 0.36.0 contains a fix for this issue. As a workaround, use `BigInt` to represent `Slot` and `Epoch` values in `AttesterSlashing` and `ProposerSlashing` objects. `BigInt` is too slow to be used in all `Slot` and `Epoch` cases, so one may carefully use `BigInt` just where necessary for consensus."}]},"impact":{"cvss":{"attackComplexity":"LOW","attackVector":"NETWORK","availabilityImpact":"NONE","baseScore":7.5,"baseSeverity":"HIGH","confidentialityImpact":"NONE","integrityImpact":"HIGH","privilegesRequired":"NONE","scope":"UNCHANGED","userInteraction":"NONE","vectorString":"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N","version":"3.1"}},"problemtype":{"problemtype_data":[{"description":[{"lang":"eng","value":"CWE-190: Integer Overflow or Wraparound"}]}]},"references":{"reference_data":[{"name":"https://github.com/ChainSafe/lodestar/security/advisories/GHSA-cvj7-5f3c-9vg9","refsource":"CONFIRM","url":"https://github.com/ChainSafe/lodestar/security/advisories/GHSA-cvj7-5f3c-9vg9"},{"name":"https://github.com/ChainSafe/lodestar/pull/3977","refsource":"MISC","url":"https://github.com/ChainSafe/lodestar/pull/3977"},{"name":"https://github.com/ChainSafe/lodestar/releases/tag/v0.36.0","refsource":"MISC","url":"https://github.com/ChainSafe/lodestar/releases/tag/v0.36.0"}]},"source":{"advisory":"GHSA-cvj7-5f3c-9vg9","discovery":"UNKNOWN"}}},"adp":[{"providerMetadata":{"orgId":"af854a3a-2127-422b-91ae-364da2661108","shortName":"CVE","dateUpdated":"2024-08-03T06:17:54.286Z"},"title":"CVE Program Container","references":[{"tags":["x_refsource_CONFIRM","x_transferred"],"url":"https://github.com/ChainSafe/lodestar/security/advisories/GHSA-cvj7-5f3c-9vg9"},{"tags":["x_refsource_MISC","x_transferred"],"url":"https://github.com/ChainSafe/lodestar/pull/3977"},{"tags":["x_refsource_MISC","x_transferred"],"url":"https://github.com/ChainSafe/lodestar/releases/tag/v0.36.0"}]},{"metrics":[{"other":{"type":"ssvc","content":{"timestamp":"2025-04-23T15:54:48.726800Z","id":"CVE-2022-29219","options":[{"Exploitation":"none"},{"Automatable":"yes"},{"Technical Impact":"partial"}],"role":"CISA Coordinator","version":"2.0.3"}}}],"title":"CISA ADP Vulnrichment","providerMetadata":{"orgId":"134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0","shortName":"CISA-ADP","dateUpdated":"2025-04-23T18:22:36.298Z"}}]},"cveMetadata":{"assignerOrgId":"a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa","assignerShortName":"GitHub_M","cveId":"CVE-2022-29219","datePublished":"2022-05-24T14:15:14.000Z","dateReserved":"2022-04-13T00:00:00.000Z","dateUpdated":"2025-04-23T18:22:36.298Z","state":"PUBLISHED"},"dataType":"CVE_RECORD","dataVersion":"5.1"}