arenavec has multiple memory corruption vulnerabilities in safe APIs
What to do
Vendor response not established. Follow the primary source's mitigation guidance and check back for a fix.
This page has no inventory attached, so it cannot say whether you are affected. A vendor fix is not proof that your deployment is fixed.
Affected packages
crates.io arenavec
- Affected
- <= 0.1.1
- Fixed in
- no fixed version recorded
Sources
- GitHub Advisory Database and maintainer security advisories on GitHub
GitHub-reviewed advisory GHSA-3632-54q8-m96x lists affected ranges: crates.io arenavec >=0 <=0.1.1
VerifiedObserved Structured GitHub Advisory Database record (type=reviewed) from the GitHub REST API.
Severity and exploitation
- Exploitation
- No confirmed exploitation recorded. Patch Next marks exploitation only from CISA KEV.
- CVSS 4.0
- 8.9 · CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P · score source
- EPSS
- No dated EPSS signal available.
Source description
As published by the source; long descriptions are shortened.
The crate has the following vulnerabilities: - The public trait arenavec::common::AllocHandle allows the return of raw pointers through its methods allocate and allocateorextend. However, the trait is not marked as unsafe, meaning users of the crate may implement it under the assumption that the library safely handles the returned raw pointers. These raw pointers can later be dereferenced within safe APIs of the crate-such as arenavec::common::SliceVec::push-potentially leading to arbitrary memory access. - The safe API arenavec::common::SliceVec::reserve can reach the private function arenavec::common::allocateinner. Incorrect behavior in allocateinner may result in a SliceVec with an increased capacity, even though the underlying memory has not actually been expanded. This mismatch between SliceVec.capacity and the actual reserved memory can lead to a heap buffer overflow. - The safe API arenavec::common::SliceVec::splitoff can duplicate the ownership of the elements in self (of…
Dates and revisions
- Published by the source
- Last modified by the source
- Source last checked
- Revision 1 · created ·
Published from ghsa record GHSA-3632-54q8-m96x
Agent brief
Preview the exact text before you copy it. Commands are read-only suggestions; review them before running anything.
# Patch Next advisory brief: GHSA-3632-54q8-m96x Advisory: arenavec has multiple memory corruption vulnerabilities in safe APIs IDs: GHSA-3632-54q8-m96x Record: https://patchnext.com/advisories/ghsa-3632-54q8-m96x (revision 1, source checked 26 Oct 2026, 15:39 UTC) Inventory: none attached. This brief comes from a public page and does not say whether any deployment is affected. Severity: High (CVSS 8.9) Exploitation: no confirmed exploitation recorded. Patch Next confirms exploitation only from CISA KEV. Vendor response: Vendor response not established. A vendor fix does not mean a deployment is fixed. ## Affected components - crates.io arenavec: affected <= 0.1.1 ## Suggested inspection (read-only) - crates.io arenavec: check the installed version with your package manager. ## Supported action No complete vendor fix is recorded. Follow the primary source's mitigation guidance and check this record again before closing anything. ## Required regression checks - Run the test suite and a production build. - Exercise the features that depend on arenavec. - Repeat the inspection and confirm that only fixed versions remain installed. ## Rollback considerations - Keep the previous lockfile and deployment artifact. Rolling back reinstates the vulnerable version, so apply any documented mitigation while you fix forward. ## Unresolved questions - Which deployments run an affected version? - Exploitation status can change. Check again before lowering the priority. - Mark the work resolved only after the fixed version is verified in production. ## Sources - Verified: https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-3632-54q8-m96x (GitHub-reviewed advisory GHSA-3632-54q8-m96x lists affected ranges: crates.io arenavec >=0 <=0.1.1) Commands are suggestions: review each one before running it.
Loading voting…