CVE-2022-29219

Lodestar is a TypeScript implementation of the Ethereum Consensus specification. Prior to version 0.36.0, there is a possible consensus split given maliciously-crafted AttesterSlashing or ProposerSlashing being included on-chain. Because the developers represent uint64 values as native javascript numbers, 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. Version 0.36.0 contains a fix for this issue. As a workaround, 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 one may carefully use BigInt just where necessary for consensus.

Weakness

The product performs a calculation that can produce an integer overflow or wraparound when the logic assumes that the resulting value will always be larger than the original value. This occurs when an integer value is incremented to a value that is too large to store in the associated representation. When this occurs, the value may become a very small or negative number.

Affected Software

Potential Mitigations

• Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
• If possible, choose a language or compiler that performs automatic bounds checking.
• Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid [REF-1482].
• Use libraries or frameworks that make it easier to handle numbers without unexpected consequences.
• Examples include safe integer handling packages such as SafeInt (C++) or IntegerLib (C or C++). [REF-106]
• Perform input validation on any numeric input by ensuring that it is within the expected range. Enforce that the input meets both the minimum and maximum requirements for the expected range.
• Use unsigned integers where possible. This makes it easier to perform validation for integer overflows. When signed integers are required, ensure that the range check includes minimum values as well as maximum values.
• Understand the programming language’s underlying representation and how it interacts with numeric calculation (CWE-681). Pay close attention to byte size discrepancies, precision, signed/unsigned distinctions, truncation, conversion and casting between types, “not-a-number” calculations, and how the language handles numbers that are too large or too small for its underlying representation. [REF-7]
• Also be careful to account for 32-bit, 64-bit, and other potential differences that may affect the numeric representation.

Related Attack Patterns

• https://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/92.html

References

• https://github.com/ChainSafe/lodestar/pull/3977
• https://github.com/ChainSafe/lodestar/releases/tag/v0.36.0
• https://github.com/ChainSafe/lodestar/security/advisories/GHSA-cvj7-5f3c-9vg9
• https://github.com/ChainSafe/lodestar/pull/3977
• https://github.com/ChainSafe/lodestar/releases/tag/v0.36.0
• https://github.com/ChainSafe/lodestar/security/advisories/GHSA-cvj7-5f3c-9vg9