Every CVE Search/ Get API key

CVE-2026-41583

ZEBRA: Consensus Divergence in Transparent Sighash Hash-Type Handling

9.3 CriticalFix available

ZEBRA is a Zcash node written entirely in Rust. Prior to zebrad version 4.3.1 and prior to zebra-script version 5.0.2, after a refactoring, Zebra failed to validate a consensus rule that restricted the possible values of sighash hash types for V5 transactions which were enabled in the NU5 network upgrade. Zebra nodes could thus accept and eventually mine a block that would be considered invalid by zcashd nodes, creating a consensus split between Zebra and zcashd nodes. In a similar vein, for V4 transactions, Zebra mistakenly used the "canonical" hash type when computing the sighash while zcashd (correctly per the spec) uses the raw value, which could also crate a consensus split. This issue has been patched in zebrad version 4.3.1 and zebra-script version 5.0.2.

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
High

Exploit likelihood

0.28%Up 0.2 points since May 9, 2026
90%50%10%1%

What each source reports

CVE List Score used 9.3

ZEBRA: Consensus Divergence in Transparent Sighash Hash-Type Handling

ZEBRA is a Zcash node written entirely in Rust. Prior to zebrad version 4.3.1 and prior to zebra-script version 5.0.2, after a refactoring, Zebra failed to validate a consensus rule that restricted the possible values of sighash hash types for V5 transactions which were enabled in the NU5 network upgrade. Zebra nodes could thus accept and eventually mine a block that would be considered invalid by zcashd nodes, creating a consensus split between Zebra and zcashd nodes. In a similar vein, for V4 transactions, Zebra mistakenly used the "canonical" hash type when computing the sighash while zcashd (correctly per the spec) uses the raw value, which could also crate a consensus split. This issue has been patched in zebrad version 4.3.1 and zebra-script version 5.0.2.

Record
CVE-2026-41583
CVSS 4.0
9.3 CriticalCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:H/SA:H
Weakness
CWE-573
Updated
2026-11-02
EUVDEUVD-2026-28653 9.3

ZEBRA is a Zcash node written entirely in Rust. Prior to zebrad version 4.3.1 and prior to zebra-script version 5.0.2, after a refactoring, Zebra failed to validate a consensus rule that restricted the possible values of sighash hash types for V5 transactions which were enabled in the NU5 network upgrade. Zebra nodes could thus accept and eventually mine a block that would be considered invalid by zcashd nodes, creating a consensus split between Zebra and zcashd nodes. In a similar vein, for V4 transactions, Zebra mistakenly used the "canonical" hash type when computing the sighash while zcashd (correctly per the spec) uses the raw value, which could also crate a consensus split. This issue has been patched in zebrad version 4.3.1 and zebra-script version 5.0.2.

Record
EUVD-2026-28653
CVSS 4.0
9.3 CriticalCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:H/SA:H
Updated
2026-11-02
GitHub AdvisoriesGHSA-8m29-fpq5-89jj 9.3

Zebra Vulnerable to Consensus Divergence in Transparent Sighash Hash-Type Handling

CVE-2026-41583: Consensus Divergence in Transparent Sighash Hash-Type Handling

Summary

After a refactoring, Zebra failed to validate a consensus rule that restricted the possible values of sighash hash types for V5 transactions which were enabled in the NU5 network upgrade. Zebra nodes could thus accept and eventually mine a block that would be considered invalid by zcashd nodes, creating a consensus split between Zebra and zcashd nodes.

In a similar vein, for V4 transactions, Zebra mistakenly used the "canonical" hash type when computing the sighash while zcashd (correctly per the spec) uses the raw value, which could also crate a consensus split.

Severity

Critical - This is a Consensus Vulnerability that could allow a malicious party to induce network partitioning, service disruption, and potential double-spend attacks against affected nodes.

Note that the impact is currently alleviated by the fact that currently most miners run zcashd.

Affected Versions

All Zebra versions prior to version 4.3.1. (Some older versions are not impacted but are no longer supported by the network.)

Description

Verification of transparent transactions inherits the Bitcoin Script verification code in C++. Since it is consensus-critical, this code was called from Zebra through foreign function interface (FFI). That interface was clunky because it required parsing the whole transaction in C++ code, which would then pull Rust libraries which could get in conflict with Zebra code. A refactoring was done so that only the verification itself was done in C++, and the rest done by Rust code, using a callback. However, in this refactoring, it was not noticed that a particular consensus rule - only accepting known hash types in transparent transaction signatures - was being enforced in C++ code and thus had to be enforced by the Rust caller.

An attacker could exploit this by:

  • Submitting a V4 or V5 transaction with an invalid hash type
  • The V5 transaction would be accepted by Zebra nodes but not by zcashd nodes (and vice-versa for V4), creating a consensus split in the network.

Impact

Consensus Failure

  • Attack Vector: Network.
  • Effect: Network partition/consensus split.
  • Scope: Any Zebra affected Zebra node

Fixed Versions

This issue is fixed in Zebra 4.3.1.

The fix adds the consensus check in the caller of the C++ verification code. It also uses the raw hash type for V4 sighash computations.

Mitigation

Users should upgrade to Zebra 4.3.1 or later immediately.

There are no known workarounds for this issue. Immediate upgrade is the only way to ensure the node remains on the correct consensus path and is protected against malicious chain forks.

Credits

Thanks Alex “Scalar” Sol for finding and reporting the issue, and to @sangsoo-osec who independently found the same issue and demonstrated that the V4 variant was also exploitable.

Record
GHSA-8m29-fpq5-89jj
CVSS 4.0
9.3 CriticalCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:H/SA:H
CVSS 3.1
9.1 CriticalCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
Weakness
CWE-573
Updated
2026-11-02
NVD 9.3

ZEBRA is a Zcash node written entirely in Rust. Prior to zebrad version 4.3.1 and prior to zebra-script version 5.0.2, after a refactoring, Zebra failed to validate a consensus rule that restricted the possible values of sighash hash types for V5 transactions which were enabled in the NU5 network upgrade. Zebra nodes could thus accept and eventually mine a block that would be considered invalid by zcashd nodes, creating a consensus split between Zebra and zcashd nodes. In a similar vein, for V4 transactions, Zebra mistakenly used the "canonical" hash type when computing the sighash while zcashd (correctly per the spec) uses the raw value, which could also crate a consensus split. This issue has been patched in zebrad version 4.3.1 and zebra-script version 5.0.2.

Record
CVE-2026-41583
CVSS 4.0
9.3 CriticalCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:H/SA:H/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
CVSS 3.1
9.1 CriticalCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
Weakness
CWE-573
Updated
2026-11-02
OSV 9.3

ZEBRA: Consensus Divergence in Transparent Sighash Hash-Type Handling

ZEBRA is a Zcash node written entirely in Rust. Prior to zebrad version 4.3.1 and prior to zebra-script version 5.0.2, after a refactoring, Zebra failed to validate a consensus rule that restricted the possible values of sighash hash types for V5 transactions which were enabled in the NU5 network upgrade. Zebra nodes could thus accept and eventually mine a block that would be considered invalid by zcashd nodes, creating a consensus split between Zebra and zcashd nodes. In a similar vein, for V4 transactions, Zebra mistakenly used the "canonical" hash type when computing the sighash while zcashd (correctly per the spec) uses the raw value, which could also crate a consensus split. This issue has been patched in zebrad version 4.3.1 and zebra-script version 5.0.2.

Record
CVE-2026-41583
CVSS 4.0
9.3 CriticalCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:H/SA:H
Weakness
CWE-573
Updated
2026-11-02
OSVGHSA-8m29-fpq5-89jj 9.3

Zebra Vulnerable to Consensus Divergence in Transparent Sighash Hash-Type Handling

CVE-2026-41583: Consensus Divergence in Transparent Sighash Hash-Type Handling

Summary

After a refactoring, Zebra failed to validate a consensus rule that restricted the possible values of sighash hash types for V5 transactions which were enabled in the NU5 network upgrade. Zebra nodes could thus accept and eventually mine a block that would be considered invalid by zcashd nodes, creating a consensus split between Zebra and zcashd nodes.

In a similar vein, for V4 transactions, Zebra mistakenly used the "canonical" hash type when computing the sighash while zcashd (correctly per the spec) uses the raw value, which could also crate a consensus split.

Severity

Critical - This is a Consensus Vulnerability that could allow a malicious party to induce network partitioning, service disruption, and potential double-spend attacks against affected nodes.

Note that the impact is currently alleviated by the fact that currently most miners run zcashd.

Affected Versions

All Zebra versions prior to version 4.3.1. (Some older versions are not impacted but are no longer supported by the network.)

Description

Verification of transparent transactions inherits the Bitcoin Script verification code in C++. Since it is consensus-critical, this code was called from Zebra through foreign function interface (FFI). That interface was clunky because it required parsing the whole transaction in C++ code, which would then pull Rust libraries which could get in conflict with Zebra code. A refactoring was done so that only the verification itself was done in C++, and the rest done by Rust code, using a callback. However, in this refactoring, it was not noticed that a particular consensus rule - only accepting known hash types in transparent transaction signatures - was being enforced in C++ code and thus had to be enforced by the Rust caller.

An attacker could exploit this by:

  • Submitting a V4 or V5 transaction with an invalid hash type
  • The V5 transaction would be accepted by Zebra nodes but not by zcashd nodes (and vice-versa for V4), creating a consensus split in the network.

Impact

Consensus Failure

  • Attack Vector: Network.
  • Effect: Network partition/consensus split.
  • Scope: Any Zebra affected Zebra node

Fixed Versions

This issue is fixed in Zebra 4.3.1.

The fix adds the consensus check in the caller of the C++ verification code. It also uses the raw hash type for V4 sighash computations.

Mitigation

Users should upgrade to Zebra 4.3.1 or later immediately.

There are no known workarounds for this issue. Immediate upgrade is the only way to ensure the node remains on the correct consensus path and is protected against malicious chain forks.

Credits

Thanks Alex “Scalar” Sol for finding and reporting the issue, and to @sangsoo-osec who independently found the same issue and demonstrated that the V4 variant was also exploitable.

Record
GHSA-8m29-fpq5-89jj
CVSS 4.0
9.3 CriticalCVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:H/SA:H
CVSS 3.1
9.1 CriticalCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H
Weakness
CWE-573
Updated
2026-11-02

Affected products

Affected packages

Affected packages
PackageAffectedFixed
zebrad
crates.io
before 4.3.1
4.3.1
zebra-script
crates.io
before 5.0.2
5.0.2

History

History
RecordedChangedSources
first indexedCVE List, EUVD, GitHub Advisories, NVD, OSV

Dates are when Every CVE recorded each change. Upstream dates may differ.

In short

CVE-2026-41583 is a critical vulnerability (CVSS 9.3) in Zcashfoundation Zebra, published April 18, 2026. No source lists public exploit code. EPSS puts the chance of exploitation in the next 30 days at 0.28%, the 20th percentile. Fixed in zebrad 4.3.1.

References

MoveEnter Open