Contract ownership overwrite via storage-slot wraparound
Published May 8, 2023 · Updated Jan 29, 2025
Storage allocation overflow in Vyper before 0.3.8 allows remote attackers to overwrite variables in compiled smart contracts via calldata. The compiler's storage allocator accepts an array extending beyond the 2^256-slot boundary, so generated modular pointer arithmetic wraps a large index onto earlier storage. A deployed contract must contain such an oversized array and an externally callable indexed write; crafted calldata then changes protected state, including ownership.
Summary
What happened
Storage allocation overflow in Vyper before 0.3.8 allows remote attackers to overwrite variables in compiled smart contracts via calldata. The compiler's storage allocator accepts an array extending beyond the 2^256-slot boundary, so generated modular pointer arithmetic wraps a large index onto earlier storage. A deployed contract must contain such an oversized array and an externally callable indexed write; crafted calldata then changes protected state, including ownership.
The record
- CVE
- CVE-2023-30837
- Published
- May 8, 2023
- Updated
- Jan 29, 2025
- Vendor
- Vyper
- Product
- Vyper
- Classifications
- CWE-789, T1565.001
- Attack vector
- network
- Privileges
- unauthenticated
Timeline
How it unfolded
- May 8, 2023CVE publishedPublication date reported by the CVE source.
- Jan 29, 2025Record updatedLatest update available in the CVE record.
Exploitability
Present is not the same as exploitable
Compare your product and version with the public record. A matching version still requires validation against your environment.
Is a vulnerable build present?
Compare these published version ranges with your installed build and any vendor patches.
- Affected versionversion=< 0.3.8
What conditions does exploitation require?
What is affected?
Published CVSS scores
CVSS describes severity. EPSS estimates exploitation probability.
Attacks
What attackers are doing with it
Daily unique IPs observed by Shadowserver honeypots for known exploited vulnerabilities (KEVs). Missing observations do not establish an absence of attacks.
Weakness, pattern, technique
Public exploit references
- Owner-variable overwrite calldata proof of conceptproof of concept · demonstrated
Labels summarize the accepted research assessment. They do not indicate a test against your environment.
Technologies
Your stack
See the directory against your own environment.
Your stack
Check the software in your environment
Book a demo to see how Hinoki identifies affected software and validates exploitability in your environment.
Book a demo