Every CVESearch/Get API key

GHSA-7p92-x423-vwj6

Plonk verifier KZG multi point verification

No scoreFix available

Impact

The vulnerability allows a third party to derive a valid proof from a valid initial tuple {proof, public_inputs}, corresponding to the same public inputs as the initial proof. It is due to a randomness being generated using a small part of the scratch memory describing the state, allowing for degrees of freedom in the transcript.

Note that the impact is limited to the PlonK verifier smart contract.

Patches

We still use a hash function on some data to have a pseudo rng, but instead of hashing the first 32 bytes of the state ( let random := mod(keccak256(state, 0x20), r_mod) )

we hash the whole state at this point of the verifier as if it was a Fiat Shamir transcript:

        mstore(mPtr, mload(add(state, STATE_FOLDED_DIGESTS_X)))
        mstore(add(mPtr, 0x20), mload(add(state, STATE_FOLDED_DIGESTS_Y)))
        mstore(add(mPtr, 0x40), calldataload(add(aproof, PROOF_BATCH_OPENING_AT_ZETA_X)))
        mstore(add(mPtr, 0x60), calldataload(add(aproof, PROOF_BATCH_OPENING_AT_ZETA_Y)))
        mstore(add(mPtr, 0x80), calldataload(add(aproof, PROOF_GRAND_PRODUCT_COMMITMENT_X)))
        mstore(add(mPtr, 0xa0), calldataload(add(aproof, PROOF_GRAND_PRODUCT_COMMITMENT_Y)))
        mstore(add(mPtr, 0xc0), calldataload(add(aproof, PROOF_OPENING_AT_ZETA_OMEGA_X)))
        mstore(add(mPtr, 0xe0), calldataload(add(aproof, PROOF_OPENING_AT_ZETA_OMEGA_Y)))
        mstore(add(mPtr, 0x100), mload(add(state, STATE_ZETA)))
        mstore(add(mPtr, 0x120), mload(add(state, STATE_GAMMA_KZG)))
        let random := staticcall(gas(), 0x2, mPtr, 0x140, mPtr, 0x20)

Workarounds

In the function batch_verify_multi_points, the variable random (corresponding to u in the paper, step 12 of the plonk verification process) should depend on state_folded_digests_x, state_folded_digests_y, proof_grand_product_commitment_x, proof_grand_product_commitment_y and state_zeta (by hashing those values for instance).

What each source reports

GitHub AdvisoriesNo score

Plonk verifier KZG multi point verification

Impact

The vulnerability allows a third party to derive a valid proof from a valid initial tuple {proof, public_inputs}, corresponding to the same public inputs as the initial proof. It is due to a randomness being generated using a small part of the scratch memory describing the state, allowing for degrees of freedom in the transcript.

Note that the impact is limited to the PlonK verifier smart contract.

Patches

We still use a hash function on some data to have a pseudo rng, but instead of hashing the first 32 bytes of the state ( let random := mod(keccak256(state, 0x20), r_mod) )

we hash the whole state at this point of the verifier as if it was a Fiat Shamir transcript:

        mstore(mPtr, mload(add(state, STATE_FOLDED_DIGESTS_X)))
        mstore(add(mPtr, 0x20), mload(add(state, STATE_FOLDED_DIGESTS_Y)))
        mstore(add(mPtr, 0x40), calldataload(add(aproof, PROOF_BATCH_OPENING_AT_ZETA_X)))
        mstore(add(mPtr, 0x60), calldataload(add(aproof, PROOF_BATCH_OPENING_AT_ZETA_Y)))
        mstore(add(mPtr, 0x80), calldataload(add(aproof, PROOF_GRAND_PRODUCT_COMMITMENT_X)))
        mstore(add(mPtr, 0xa0), calldataload(add(aproof, PROOF_GRAND_PRODUCT_COMMITMENT_Y)))
        mstore(add(mPtr, 0xc0), calldataload(add(aproof, PROOF_OPENING_AT_ZETA_OMEGA_X)))
        mstore(add(mPtr, 0xe0), calldataload(add(aproof, PROOF_OPENING_AT_ZETA_OMEGA_Y)))
        mstore(add(mPtr, 0x100), mload(add(state, STATE_ZETA)))
        mstore(add(mPtr, 0x120), mload(add(state, STATE_GAMMA_KZG)))
        let random := staticcall(gas(), 0x2, mPtr, 0x140, mPtr, 0x20)

Workarounds

In the function batch_verify_multi_points, the variable random (corresponding to u in the paper, step 12 of the plonk verification process) should depend on state_folded_digests_x, state_folded_digests_y, proof_grand_product_commitment_x, proof_grand_product_commitment_y and state_zeta (by hashing those values for instance).

Record
GHSA-7p92-x423-vwj6
Updated
2026-11-02
OSVNo score

Plonk verifier KZG multi point verification

Impact

The vulnerability allows a third party to derive a valid proof from a valid initial tuple {proof, public_inputs}, corresponding to the same public inputs as the initial proof. It is due to a randomness being generated using a small part of the scratch memory describing the state, allowing for degrees of freedom in the transcript.

Note that the impact is limited to the PlonK verifier smart contract.

Patches

We still use a hash function on some data to have a pseudo rng, but instead of hashing the first 32 bytes of the state ( let random := mod(keccak256(state, 0x20), r_mod) )

we hash the whole state at this point of the verifier as if it was a Fiat Shamir transcript:

        mstore(mPtr, mload(add(state, STATE_FOLDED_DIGESTS_X)))
        mstore(add(mPtr, 0x20), mload(add(state, STATE_FOLDED_DIGESTS_Y)))
        mstore(add(mPtr, 0x40), calldataload(add(aproof, PROOF_BATCH_OPENING_AT_ZETA_X)))
        mstore(add(mPtr, 0x60), calldataload(add(aproof, PROOF_BATCH_OPENING_AT_ZETA_Y)))
        mstore(add(mPtr, 0x80), calldataload(add(aproof, PROOF_GRAND_PRODUCT_COMMITMENT_X)))
        mstore(add(mPtr, 0xa0), calldataload(add(aproof, PROOF_GRAND_PRODUCT_COMMITMENT_Y)))
        mstore(add(mPtr, 0xc0), calldataload(add(aproof, PROOF_OPENING_AT_ZETA_OMEGA_X)))
        mstore(add(mPtr, 0xe0), calldataload(add(aproof, PROOF_OPENING_AT_ZETA_OMEGA_Y)))
        mstore(add(mPtr, 0x100), mload(add(state, STATE_ZETA)))
        mstore(add(mPtr, 0x120), mload(add(state, STATE_GAMMA_KZG)))
        let random := staticcall(gas(), 0x2, mPtr, 0x140, mPtr, 0x20)

Workarounds

In the function batch_verify_multi_points, the variable random (corresponding to u in the paper, step 12 of the plonk verification process) should depend on state_folded_digests_x, state_folded_digests_y, proof_grand_product_commitment_x, proof_grand_product_commitment_y and state_zeta (by hashing those values for instance).

Record
GHSA-7p92-x423-vwj6
Updated
2026-11-02
OSVGO-2023-2119No score

Proof forgery due to insufficient randomness in github.com/consensys/gnark

A a third party may derive a valid proof from a valid initial tuple {proof, public_inputs}, corresponding to the same public inputs as the initial proof. This vulnerability is due to randomness being generated using a small part of the scratch memory describing the state, allowing for degrees of freedom in the transcript. Note that the impact is limited to the PlonK verifier smart contract.

Record
GO-2023-2119
Updated
2026-11-02

Affected packages

Affected packages
PackageAffectedFixed
github.com/consensys/gnark
Go
before 0.9.1
0.9.1

History

History
RecordedChangedSources
first indexedGitHub Advisories, OSV

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

In short

GHSA-7p92-x423-vwj6 is a vulnerability with no CVSS score yet in github.com/consensys/gnark, published October 17, 2023. No source lists public exploit code. Fixed in github.com/consensys/gnark 0.9.1.

References

MoveEnter Open