CVE-2022-29219
Integer Overflow in Lodestar
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.
Attack profile
How easy it is to exploit
- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges needed
- None
- User interaction
- None
What an attacker can affect
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
Exploit likelihood
What each source reports
CVE List Score used
Integer Overflow in Lodestar
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.
- Record
CVE-2022-29219- CVSS 3.1
- 7.5 High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N - Weakness
- CWE-190
- Updated
- 2026-11-02
EUVDEUVD-2022-3638
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.
- Record
EUVD-2022-3638- CVSS 3.1
- 7.5 High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N - Updated
- 2026-11-02
GitHub AdvisoriesGHSA-cvj7-5f3c-9vg9
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 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.
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.
- Record
GHSA-cvj7-5f3c-9vg9- CVSS 3.1
- 7.5 High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N - Weakness
- CWE-190
- Updated
- 2026-11-02
NVD
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.
- Record
CVE-2022-29219- CVSS 3.1
- 7.5 High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N - CVSS 2.0
- 5.0 Medium
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:P/A:N - Weakness
- CWE-190
- Updated
- 2026-11-02
OSV
Integer Overflow in Lodestar
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.
- Record
CVE-2022-29219- CVSS 3.1
- 7.5 High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N - Weakness
- CWE-190
- Updated
- 2026-11-02
OSVGHSA-cvj7-5f3c-9vg9
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 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.
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.
- Record
GHSA-cvj7-5f3c-9vg9- CVSS 3.1
- 7.5 High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N - Weakness
- CWE-190
- Updated
- 2026-11-02
Affected products
Affected packages
| Package | Affected | Fixed |
|---|---|---|
@chainsafe/lodestarnpm |
before 0.36.0 | 0.36.0 |
History
| Recorded | Changed | Sources |
|---|---|---|
| first indexed | CVE List, EUVD, GitHub Advisories, NVD, OSV |
Dates are when Every CVE recorded each change. Upstream dates may differ.
In short
CVE-2022-29219 is a high vulnerability (CVSS 7.5) in Chainsafe Lodestar, published May 24, 2022. No source lists public exploit code. EPSS puts the chance of exploitation in the next 30 days at 1.34%, the 71st percentile. Fixed in @chainsafe/lodestar 0.36.0.
References
github.com/ChainSafe/lodestar/security/advisories/GHSA-cvj7-5f3c-9vg9
nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-29219