CVE-2026-6654 — thin-vec
MEDIUMCVE-2026-6654 is a medium-severity (CVSS 5.1) CWE-415 vulnerability in thin-vec. A fix is available for thin-vec — see the affected versions and patch details below.
Use-After-Free and Double-Free in IntoIter::drop when element drop panics
Exploitation Status
No confirmed exploitation observed yet
- CISA’s own triage has not observed active exploitation or public proof-of-concept code for this CVE as of its last assessment.
Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for CVE-2026-6654.
EPSS Exploitation Probability
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-2026-6654 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 377,636 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
thin-vecReal-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects crates.io packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.
Description
Summary
A Double Free / Use-After-Free (UAF) vulnerability has been identified in the IntoIter::drop and ThinVec::clear implementations of the thin_vec crate.
Both vulnerabilities share the same root cause and can trigger memory corruption using only safe Rust code — no unsafe blocks required.
Undefined Behavior has been confirmed via Miri and AddressSanitizer (ASAN).
Details
Both vulnerabilities share the same root cause. When a panic occurs during sequential element deallocation, the subsequent length cleanup code (set_len(0)) is never executed. During stack unwinding, the container is dropped again, causing already-freed memory to be re-freed (Double Free / UAF).
Vulnerability 1 — IntoIter::drop
Location: thin-vec/src/lib.rs L.2308~2314
IntoIter::drop transfers ownership of the internal buffer via mem::replace, then sequentially frees elements via ptr::drop_in_place.
If a panic occurs during element deallocation, set_len_non_singleton(0) is never reached. During unwinding, vec is dropped again, re-freeing already-freed elements.
The standard library's std::vec::IntoIter prevents this with a DropGuard pattern, but thin-vec lacks this defense.
// Problematic structure (conceptual representation)
impl<T> Drop for IntoIter<T> {
fn drop(&mut self) {
let mut vec = mem::replace(&mut self.vec, ThinVec::new());
unsafe {
ptr::drop_in_place(vec.remaining_slice_mut()); // ← panic may occur here
vec.set_len_non_singleton(0); // ← unreachable on panic
}
// During unwinding, vec is dropped again → Double Free
}
}
Vulnerability 2 — ThinVec::clear
clear() calls ptr::drop_in_place(&mut self[..]) followed by self.set_len(0) to reset the length.
If a panic occurs during element deallocation, set_len(0) is never executed. When the ThinVec itself is subsequently dropped, already-freed elements are freed again.
// Problematic structure (conceptual representation)
pub fn clear(&mut self) {
unsafe {
ptr::drop_in_place(&mut self[..]); // ← panic may occur here
self.set_len(0); // ← unreachable on panic
}
// ThinVec drop later → Double Free
}
Recommended Fix
Both vulnerabilities can be resolved with the same pattern:
- DropGuard pattern: Insert an RAII guard before
drop_in_placeto guaranteeset_len(0)is called regardless of panic - Pre-zeroing approach: Set the length to 0 before calling
drop_in_place
PoC
Requirements: Rust nightly toolchain, thin-vec = "0.2.14"
# Miri
cargo +nightly miri run
# ASAN
RUSTFLAGS="-Z sanitizer=address" cargo +nightly run --release
PoC-1: IntoIter::drop
use thin_vec::ThinVec;
struct PanicBomb(String);
impl Drop for PanicBomb {
fn drop(&mut self) {
if self.0 == "panic" {
panic!("panic!");
}
println!("Dropping: {}", self.0);
}
}
fn main() {
let mut v = ThinVec::new();
v.push(PanicBomb(String::from("normal1")));
v.push(PanicBomb(String::from("panic"))); // trigger element
v.push(PanicBomb(String::from("normal2")));
let mut iter = v.into_iter();
iter.next();
// When iter is dropped: panic occurs at "panic" element
// → During unwinding, Double Drop is triggered on "normal1" (already freed)
}
Miri output:
error: Undefined Behavior: pointer not dereferenceable:
alloc227 has been freed, so this pointer is dangling
stack backtrace:
3: <PanicBomb as Drop>::drop ← Double Drop entry
6: <ThinVec<T> as Drop>::drop::drop_non_singleton
9: <IntoIter<T> as Drop>::drop::drop_non_singleton ← lib.rs:2310 (root cause)
ASAN output:
==66150==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: heap-use-after-free on address 0x7afa685e0010
READ of size 7 at 0x7afa685e0010
#0 memcpy
#4 drop_in_place::<PanicBomb> ← Double Drop entry point
#5 <ThinVec as Drop>::drop::drop_non_singleton
#6 <IntoIter as Drop>::drop::drop_non_singleton
PoC-2: ThinVec::clear
use thin_vec::ThinVec;
use std::panic;
struct Poison(Box<usize>, &'static str);
impl Drop for Poison {
fn drop(&mut self) {
if self.1 == "panic" {
panic!("panic!");
}
println!("Dropping: {}", self.0);
}
}
fn main() {
let mut v = ThinVec::new();
v.push(Poison(Box::new(1), "normal1")); // index 0
v.push(Poison(Box::new(2), "panic")); // index 1 → panic triggered here
v.push(Poison(Box::new(3), "normal2")); // index 2
let _ = panic::catch_unwind(panic::AssertUnwindSafe(|| {
v.clear();
// panic occurs at "panic" element during clear()
// → set_len(0) is never called
// → already-freed elements are re-freed when v goes out of scope
}));
}
Impact
Vulnerability classification:
- CWE-415: Double Free
- CWE-416: Use-After-Free
Affected code: All code satisfying the following conditions simultaneously:
ThinVecstores heap-owning types (String,Vec,Box, etc.)- (Vulnerability 1) An iterator is created via
into_iter()and dropped before being fully consumed, or (Vulnerability 2)clear()is called while a remaining element'sDropimplementation can panic - The
Dropimplementation of a remaining element triggers a panic
Additionally, when combined with Box<dyn Trait> types, an exploit primitive enabling Arbitrary Code Execution (ACE) via heap spray and vtable hijacking has been confirmed. If the freed fat pointer slot (16 bytes) at the point of Double Drop is reclaimed by an attacker-controlled fake vtable, subsequent Drop calls can be redirected to attacker-controlled code.
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🦀crates.io | thin-vec | all versions | 0.2.16cargo update -p thin-vec --precise 0.2.16 |
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for thin-vec, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update thin-vec to 0.2.16 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2026-6654 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
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.
How O3 protects you
O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like CVE-2026-6654 can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.
Tailored to CVE-2026-6654. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is CVE-2026-6654 in your dependencies?
O3 Security finds CVE-2026-6654 across crates.io dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.