How severe is GHSA-f6hc-9g49-xmx7?

GHSA-f6hc-9g49-xmx7 has a CVSS score of 7.5/10, rated HIGH. Immediate patching is strongly recommended.

Which packages are affected by GHSA-f6hc-9g49-xmx7?

GHSA-f6hc-9g49-xmx7 affects the following packages: filippo.io/nistec (Go). Ecosystems affected: Go.

How do I fix GHSA-f6hc-9g49-xmx7?

Update filippo.io/nistec to 0.0.2 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-f6hc-9g49-xmx7 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.

How do I detect GHSA-f6hc-9g49-xmx7 in my Go dependencies?

Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for filippo.io/nistec. O3's reachability analysis confirms whether the vulnerable code path is actually invoked in your application, so you act on real exposure instead of every transitive match.

How do I mitigate GHSA-f6hc-9g49-xmx7 if there is no patch (or I can't update yet)?

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 does O3 Security protect against GHSA-f6hc-9g49-xmx7?

O3 pinpoints whether GHSA-f6hc-9g49-xmx7 is reachable in your code and exactly where to fix it, then blocks exploitation in production at runtime until the patched version is deployed.

Is GHSA-f6hc-9g49-xmx7 actively exploited in the wild?

No public exploit code has been indexed for GHSA-f6hc-9g49-xmx7 yet. This does not mean the vulnerability cannot be exploited — absence of public exploits does not imply safety. Apply the recommended fix and use O3 Security to monitor your exposure.

What is the EPSS score for GHSA-f6hc-9g49-xmx7?

GHSA-f6hc-9g49-xmx7 has an EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) score of 0.7%, placing it in the 47th percentile of all CVEs. EPSS is maintained by FIRST.org and estimates the probability that a vulnerability will be exploited in the wild within the next 30 days. This score indicates relatively lower exploitation probability, though the CVSS severity should still guide your patching priority.

What type of vulnerability is GHSA-f6hc-9g49-xmx7?

GHSA-f6hc-9g49-xmx7 is classified as CWE-682 (CWE-682). This weakness type describe the underlying flaw category, which helps determine the potential impact and the right class of mitigation.

When was GHSA-f6hc-9g49-xmx7 published, and has it been updated?

GHSA-f6hc-9g49-xmx7 was published on March 1, 2023 and was last updated on May 20, 2024. Advisory data evolves as severity scores, affected ranges, and exploit intelligence are revised — always check the latest version of the advisory before acting.

🐹 Go

GHSA-f6hc-9g49-xmx7

HIGH

nistec has Incorrect Calculation in Multiplication of unreduced P-256 scalars

Also known asCVE-2023-24533GO-2023-1595

Published

Mar 1, 2023

Updated

May 20, 2024

Affected

1 pkg

Patched

1 / 1

Exploits

None indexed

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗

0.7%probability of exploitation in next 30 days

Lower Risk47th percentile+0.44%

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.

Blast Radius

1 pkg affected

🐹filippo.io/nistec

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

Description

Multiplication of certain unreduced P-256 scalars produce incorrect results. There are no protocols known at this time that can be attacked due to this.

From the fix commit notes:

Unlike the rest of nistec, the P-256 assembly doesn't use complete addition formulas, meaning that p256PointAdd[Affine]Asm won't return the correct value if the two inputs are equal.

This was (undocumentedly) ignored in the scalar multiplication loops because as long as the input point is not the identity and the scalar is lower than the order of the group, the addition inputs can't be the same.

As part of the math/big rewrite, we went however from always reducing the scalar to only checking its length, under the incorrect assumption that the scalar multiplication loop didn't require reduction.

Affected Packages

1 total 1 fixed

Ecosystem	Package	Vulnerable range	Fix
🐹Go	`filippo.io/nistec`	all versions	0.0.2

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency

Detect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for filippo.io/nistec. O3's reachability analysis confirms whether the vulnerable code path is actually invoked in your application, so you act on real exposure instead of every transitive match.
Fix
Update filippo.io/nistec to 0.0.2 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-f6hc-9g49-xmx7 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 pinpoints whether GHSA-f6hc-9g49-xmx7 is reachable in your code and exactly where to fix it, then blocks exploitation in production at runtime until the patched version is deployed.

Tailored to GHSA-f6hc-9g49-xmx7. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

Multiplication of certain unreduced P-256 scalars produce incorrect results. There are no protocols known at this time that can be attacked due to this. From the fix commit notes: > Unlike the rest of nistec, the P-256 assembly doesn't use complete addition formulas, meaning that p256PointAdd[Affine]Asm won't return the correct value if the two inputs are equal. > > This was (undocumentedly) ignored in the scalar multiplication loops because as long as the input point is not the identity and the scalar is lower than the order of the group, the addition inputs can't be the same. > > As part

O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-f6hc-9g49-xmx7 in your dependencies?

O3 detects GHSA-f6hc-9g49-xmx7 across Go dependencies and uses function-level reachability to confirm whether the vulnerable code path is actually reachable — not just present. No false positives.

Scan my dependencies How O3 SCA works