Forged Groth16 proofs via shared commitment scalar
Published Sep 6, 2024 · Updated Sep 6, 2024
Soundness failure in Consensys gnark before 0.11.0 allows local users to create accepted Groth16 proofs with attacker-chosen commitments. The Groth16 commitment extension reuses one scalar for every proof of knowledge, allowing basis elements from separate commitments to be mixed. Exploitation requires a circuit with multiple commitments and affects native Groth16 verification; recursive in-circuit and Solidity verifiers do not support this configuration.
Summary
What happened
Soundness failure in Consensys gnark before 0.11.0 allows local users to create accepted Groth16 proofs with attacker-chosen commitments. The Groth16 commitment extension reuses one scalar for every proof of knowledge, allowing basis elements from separate commitments to be mixed. Exploitation requires a circuit with multiple commitments and affects native Groth16 verification; recursive in-circuit and Solidity verifiers do not support this configuration.
The record
- CVE
- CVE-2024-45039
- Published
- Sep 6, 2024
- Updated
- Sep 6, 2024
- Vendor
- Consensys
- Product
- gnark
- Classifications
- CWE-200
- Attack vector
- local
- Privileges
- unauthenticated
Timeline
How it unfolded
- Sep 6, 2024CVE publishedPublication date reported by the CVE source.
- Sep 6, 2024Record 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 <0.11.0
- Affected versionversion=< 0.11.0
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
- Multi-commitment forged-proof 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