Lookup for vulnerable packages by Package URL.
| Purl | pkg:npm/%40chainsafe/lodestar-cli@0.31.1-dev.41 |
| Type | npm |
| Namespace | @chainsafe |
| Name | lodestar-cli |
| Version | 0.31.1-dev.41 |
| Qualifiers |
|
| Subpath | |
| Is_vulnerable | true |
| Next_non_vulnerable_version | 0.36.0 |
| Latest_non_vulnerable_version | 0.36.0 |
| Affected_by_vulnerabilities |
| 0 |
| url |
VCID-x77g-y3rq-ckeq |
| vulnerability_id |
VCID-x77g-y3rq-ckeq |
| summary |
AttesterSlashing number overflow
### Impact
Possible consensus split given maliciously-crafted `AttesterSlashing` or `ProposerSlashing` being included on-chain.
Since we 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.
### Patches
https://github.com/ChainSafe/lodestar/pull/3977
### Workarounds
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 we will carefully use `BigInt` just where necessary for consensus. |
| references |
| 0 |
| reference_url |
https://api.first.org/data/v1/epss?cve=CVE-2022-29219 |
| reference_id |
|
| reference_type |
|
| scores |
| 0 |
| value |
0.0042 |
| scoring_system |
epss |
| scoring_elements |
0.6228 |
| published_at |
2026-06-05T12:55:00Z |
|
| 1 |
| value |
0.0042 |
| scoring_system |
epss |
| scoring_elements |
0.6226 |
| published_at |
2026-06-08T12:55:00Z |
|
| 2 |
| value |
0.0042 |
| scoring_system |
epss |
| scoring_elements |
0.62276 |
| published_at |
2026-06-07T12:55:00Z |
|
| 3 |
| value |
0.0042 |
| scoring_system |
epss |
| scoring_elements |
0.62287 |
| published_at |
2026-06-06T12:55:00Z |
|
| 4 |
| value |
0.0042 |
| scoring_system |
epss |
| scoring_elements |
0.62231 |
| published_at |
2026-06-04T12:55:00Z |
|
|
| url |
https://api.first.org/data/v1/epss?cve=CVE-2022-29219 |
|
| 1 |
|
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
|
|
| fixed_packages |
|
| aliases |
CVE-2022-29219, GHSA-cvj7-5f3c-9vg9
|
| risk_score |
4.0 |
| exploitability |
0.5 |
| weighted_severity |
8.0 |
| resource_url |
http://public2.vulnerablecode.io/vulnerabilities/VCID-x77g-y3rq-ckeq |
|
|
| Fixing_vulnerabilities |
|
| Risk_score | 4.0 |
| Resource_url | http://public2.vulnerablecode.io/packages/pkg:npm/%2540chainsafe/lodestar-cli@0.31.1-dev.41 |