Vulnerabilidades / GHSA-cwfq-rfcr-8hmp

crítica

GHSA-cwfq-rfcr-8hmp

Zebra's Transparent SIGHASH_SINGLE Handling Diverges from zcashd for Corresponding Outputs

Publicada Modificada
En la Trivy database desde, como mínimo, el 24 oct 2026, 07:11 UTCNo consta cuándo entró antes de ese build.

Severidad por fuente

GHSA9.2CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:H/SA:N

La etiqueta propia de Trivy es CRITICAL. Crítica según GHSA.

Descripción

# `Zebra` Transparent `SIGHASH_SINGLE` Corresponding-Output Handling Diverges From `zcashd` ### Summary For V5+ transparent spends, `Zebra` and `zcashd` disagree on the same consensus rule: `SIGHASH_SINGLE` must fail when the input index has no corresponding output. `zcashd` treats this as consensus-invalid under ZIP-244, while `Zebra`'s transparent verification path computes a digest for the missing-output case instead of failing. The result is a direct block-validity split. A malformed V5 transparent transaction can be accepted by `Zebra`, retained in `Zebra`'s mempool, selected into `Zebra` `getblocktemplate`, mined into a block, and then rejected by `zcashd`. ### Details Validated code revisions used during analysis: - `zcashd`: `2c63e9aa08cb170b0feb374161bea94720c3e1f5` - `Zebra`: `a905fa19e3a91c7b4ead331e2709e6dec5db12cb` Scope note: - earlier triage material grouped pre-V5 and V5 behavior together; - re-execution on the pinned revisions did not reproduce the claimed pre-V5 / V4 reject-side behavior; - this advisory therefore covers the V5+ / ZIP-244 variant only. `zcashd` side: - Transparent scripts in blocks are checked through `TransactionSignatureChecker::CheckSig()` and `SignatureHash()`: [`zcash/src/script/interpreter.cpp`](https://github.com/zcash/zcash/blob/2c63e9aa08cb170b0feb374161bea94720c3e1f5/src/script/interpreter.cpp#L1386-L1407). - In the ZIP-244 branch, `SignatureHash()` explicitly throws when `SIGHASH_SINGLE` or `SIGHASH_SINGLE|ANYONECANPAY` is used with `nIn >= txTo.vout.size()`: [`zcash/src/script/interpreter.cpp`](https://github.com/zcash/zcash/blob/2c63e9aa08cb170b0feb374161bea94720c3e1f5/src/script/interpreter.cpp#L1221-L1259). - `CheckSig()` catches that exception and returns `false`, causing the transparent script to fail. `Zebra` side: - V5 transparent inputs route into the same FFI-based transparent script verifier used for block validation: [`zebra/zebra-consensus/src/transaction.rs`](https://github.com/ZcashFoundation/zebra/blob/a905fa19e3a91c7b4ead331e2709e6dec5db12cb/zebra-consensus/src/transaction.rs#L989-L1098). - `Zebra` converts the decoded hash type and asks its Rust sighash engine for a digest without adding the corresponding-output pre-check that `zcashd` enforces first: [`zebra/zebra-script/src/lib.rs`](https://github.com/ZcashFoundation/zebra/blob/a905fa19e3a91c7b4ead331e2709e6dec5db12cb/zebra-script/src/lib.rs#L160-L175), [`zebra/zebra-chain/src/primitives/zcash_primitives.rs`](https://github.com/ZcashFoundation/zebra/blob/a905fa19e3a91c7b4ead331e2709e6dec5db12cb/zebra-chain/src/primitives/zcash_primitives.rs#L307-L343). - `Zebra` forwards canonical `SIGHASH_SINGLE` into the Rust ZIP-244 implementation. - In that implementation, when `input.index() >= bundle.vout.len()`, the code uses `transparent_outputs_hash::<TxOut>(&[])` instead of erroring: [`zcash_primitives/src/transaction/sighash_v5.rs`](https://github.com/zcash/librustzcash/blob/c3425f9c3c7f6deb20720bb78b18f35fbbed8edd/zcash_primitives/src/transaction/sighash_v5.rs#L101-L107), [`zcash_primitives/src/transaction/sighash_v5.rs`](https://github.com/zcash/librustzcash/blob/c3425f9c3c7f6deb20720bb78b18f35fbbed8edd/zcash_primitives/src/transaction/sighash_v5.rs#L131-L139). Why this is exploitable: - the malformed transaction only needs fewer transparent outputs than inputs; - the attacker signs the digest that `Zebra` computes for the missing-output case; - `Zebra` then sees a valid transparent signature, while `zcashd` never reaches the same digest because it fails first. Ordinary path viability: - `zcashd` ordinary mempool admission is not the practical trigger path, because the same ZIP-244 `SignatureHash()` checks fail there first: [`zcash/src/main.cpp`](https://github.com/zcash/zcash/blob/2c63e9aa08cb170b0feb374161bea94720c3e1f5/src/main.cpp#L1981-L1995), [`zcash/src/script/interpreter.cpp`](https://github.com/zcash/zcash/blob/2c63e9aa08cb170b0feb374161bea94720c3e1f5/src/script/interpreter.cpp#L1221-L1259). - `Zebra` ordinary mempool admission is viable because `Zebra` uses the same transparent verifier for mempool and block validation and does not have a separate "one output per input" standardness rule here: [`zebra/zebra-consensus/src/transaction.rs`](https://github.com/ZcashFoundation/zebra/blob/a905fa19e3a91c7b4ead331e2709e6dec5db12cb/zebra-consensus/src/transaction.rs#L414-L519), [`zebra/zebrad/src/components/mempool/storage.rs`](https://github.com/ZcashFoundation/zebra/blob/a905fa19e3a91c7b4ead331e2709e6dec5db12cb/zebrad/src/components/mempool/storage.rs#L255-L376). - `Zebra` is a block-template producer, so the realistic stock path is `Zebra` mempool -> `Zebra` `getblocktemplate` -> external miner: [`zebra/zebra-rpc/src/methods/types/get_block_template/zip317.rs`](https://github.com/ZcashFoundation/zebra/blob/a905fa19e3a91c7b4ead331e2709e6dec5db12cb/zebra-rpc/src/methods/types/get_block_template/zip317.rs#L72-L105). ### PoC Validated commits: - `zcashd`: `2c63e9aa08cb170b0feb374161bea94720c3e1f5` - `Zebra`: `a905fa19e3a91c7b4ead331e2709e6dec5db12cb` Manual reproduction steps: 1. Build an otherwise-valid V5 transaction with at least two transparent inputs and only one transparent output. 2. Sign input `0` normally. 3. Sign input `1` with canonical `SIGHASH_SINGLE` or `SIGHASH_SINGLE|ANYONECANPAY`. 4. Use the digest returned by `Zebra`'s ZIP-244 path, where the missing output contributes `transparent_outputs_hash([])`. 5. Submit the transaction to `Zebra` and to `zcashd`. 6. Observe: - `Zebra` accepts it into the mempool; - `Zebra` selects it into `getblocktemplate`; - `Zebra` can mine and accept a block containing it; - `zcashd` rejects it in the ordinary mempool path. ### Impact This is a direct V5+ transparent consensus split. Who can trigger it: - an ordinary transaction author can craft the malformed V5 transparent transaction; - the accept-side stock path is `Zebra`'s mempool and block-template path; - an external miner still has to include the transaction in a block for the split to materialize. Who is impacted: - `Zebra` can accept and template a transaction / block that `zcashd` rejects; - this makes the issue both a consensus-divergence problem and a practical `Zebra` block-template safety problem.

Paquetes afectados y versiones corregidas

FuentePaqueteCorregido en
cargo::GitHub Security Advisory Rustzebrad4.4.0

Referencias

Vulnerability data compiled from the Trivy vulnerability database (trivy-db, Aqua Security, Apache License 2.0), which aggregates third-party advisories. CVE records are published by The MITRE Corporation under the CVE Terms of Use; CVE is a trademark of MITRE. This product uses data from the NVD API but is not endorsed or certified by the NVD. Severity, titles and advisory data from the GitHub Advisory Database (CC BY 4.0), Red Hat security data (CC BY 4.0) and the other sources linked on each entry. Entries may be summarised or re-formatted; the linked original is the authoritative record.