Bug 2347038 (CVE-2025-27104) - CVE-2025-27104 vyper: double eval in For List Iter in Vyper
Summary: CVE-2025-27104 vyper: double eval in For List Iter in Vyper
Keywords:
Status: NEW
Alias: CVE-2025-27104
Product: Security Response
Classification: Other
Component: vulnerability
Version: unspecified
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
low
low
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Product Security
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On: 2347306 2347307
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2025-02-21 22:01 UTC by OSIDB Bzimport
Modified: 2025-02-24 14:04 UTC (History)
0 users

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description OSIDB Bzimport 2025-02-21 22:01:14 UTC
vyper is a Pythonic Smart Contract Language for the EVM. Multiple evaluation of a single expression is possible in the iterator target of a for loop. While the iterator expression cannot produce multiple writes, it can consume side effects produced in the loop body (e.g. read a storage variable updated in the loop body) and thus lead to unexpected program behavior. Specifically, reads in iterators which contain an ifexp (e.g. `for s: uint256 in ([read(), read()] if True else [])`) may interleave reads with writes in the loop body. Vyper for loops allow two kinds of iterator targets, namely the `range()` builtin and an iterable type, like SArray and DArray. During codegen, iterable lists are required to not produce any side-effects (in the following code, `range_scope` forces `iter_list` to be parsed in a constant context, which is checked against `is_constant`). However, this does not prevent the iterator from consuming side effects provided by the body of the loop. For SArrays on the other hand, `iter_list` is instantiated in the body of a `repeat` ir, so it can be evaluated several times. This issue is being addressed and is expected to be available in version 0.4.1. Users are advised to upgrade as soon as the patched release is available. There are no known workarounds for this vulnerability.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.