Open actionable advisories and recorded vendor fixes. This public package view has no inventory attached and cannot establish whether your deployment is affected. A vendor fix never resolves your finding; verify your installed version and the source guidance.
Open advisories
2 actionable advisories, newest first. Withdrawn advisories and news are excluded. Coverage is partial.
Go github.com/supranational/blst >= 0.3.0, < 0.3.11
Fixed in
0.3.11· Vendor fix available
Issue
Impact Blst versions v0.3.0 through 0.3.10 failed to perform a signature group-check if the call to SigValidate in the Go bindings was complemented with a check for infinity. Formally speaking, infinity, or the identity element of the elliptic curve group, is a member of the group, and the group-check should allow it. An initial review of blst users on GitHub did not uncover any use of this function with the complementary infinity check. This optional check was added as a convenience feature because despite infinity being a legitimate member of the group, individual signatures should never be infinite (as it is equivalent to having zero for the secret key), and observing one should raise a flag. Description The vulnerable function is declared as SigValidate(sigInfcheck bool) bool and if called with sigInfcheck argument set to true, the group-check was omitted. The group-check is required to be performed on untrusted input, because the pairing, the corner-stone operation of the…
Recommended action: Upgrade to 0.3.11 or later, then redeploy and verify.A vendor fix does not resolve your finding until you verify it in your own systems.
Go github.com/supranational/blst >= 0.3.0, < 0.3.3
Fixed in
0.3.3· Vendor fix available
Issue
Impact Blst versions v0.3.0 to v0.3.2 can produce the incorrect outputs for some inputs to the blstfpeuclinverse function. This could theoretically result in the creation of an invalid signature from correct inputs. However, fuzzing of higher level functions such as sign and verify were unable to produce incorrect results and there has been no reported occurrences of this issue being encountered in production use. Description During the course of differential fuzzing of the blst library by @guidovranken it was discovered that blst would produce the incorrect result for some input values in the inverse function. This was the result of the introduction of a new inversion formula in version v0.3.0. This source of these incorrect outputs was due to two issues: 1. The amount of inner loop iterations was not sufficient for the algorithm to converge. 2. It was erroneously assumed that the absolute value of the intermediate result would be capped at 767-bits. As a result, some output values…
Recommended action: Upgrade to 0.3.3 or later, then redeploy and verify.A vendor fix does not resolve your finding until you verify it in your own systems.