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

GHSA-gq4h-3grw-2rhv — zebra-script

CRITICAL

GHSA-gq4h-3grw-2rhv is a critical-severity (CVSS 9.1) CWE-347 vulnerability in zebra-script. A fix is available for zebra-script — see the affected versions and patch details below.

Zebra has Consensus Divergence in Transparent Sighash Hash-Type Handling due to Stale Buffer

Also known asCVE-2026-44497
Published
May 7, 2026
Updated
May 13, 2026
Affected
2 pkgs
Patched
2 / 2
Exploits
None indexed
Exploitation data as of Sep 24, 2026 · OSV.dev, NVD, FIRST.org (EPSS)

Exploitation Status

No confirmed exploitation observed yet

  • CISA assesses this as automatable — exploitation doesn’t require manual, per-target effort, which raises the odds of mass scanning and opportunistic attacks.
  • 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 GHSA-gq4h-3grw-2rhv.

EPSS Exploitation Probability

via FIRST.org ↗
0.3%probability of exploitation in next 30 days
Lower Risk0.00%
Lower risk than most CVEs20th percentile — riskier than 20% 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

GHSA-gq4h-3grw-2rhv 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 378,567 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

2 pkgs affected
🦀zebra-script🦀zebrad

Real-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

CVE-2026-44497: Consensus Divergence in Transparent Sighash Hash-Type Handling due to Stale Buffer

Summary

The fix for https://github.com/ZcashFoundation/zebra/security/advisories/GHSA-8m29-fpq5-89jj introduced a separate issue due to insuficient error handling of the case where the sighash type is invalid, during sighash computation. Instead of returning an error, the normal flow would resume, and the input sighash buffer would be left untouched. In scenarios where a previous signature validation could leave a valid sighash in the buffer, an invalid hash-type could be incorrectly accepted, which would create a consensus split between Zebra and zcashd nodes.

Severity

Critical - This is a Consensus Vulnerability that could allow a malicious party to induce network partitioning, service disruption, and potential double-spend attacks against affected nodes.

Note that the impact is currently alleviated by the fact that currently most miners run zcashd.

Affected Versions

Zebra 4.3.1.

Description

Verification of transparent transactions inherits the Bitcoin Script verification code in C++, called from Zebra through a foreign function interface (FFI) with a Rust callback that computes the sighash. The fix for https://github.com/ZcashFoundation/zebra/security/advisories/GHSA-8m29-fpq5-89jj added the missing V5 hash-type consensus check on the Rust side, returning None for undefined hash types. However, the FFI bridge only writes to the C++ sighash buffer when the callback returns Some, and the C++ checker reads that buffer unconditionally, so the failure signal is lost.

An attacker could exploit this by:

  • Constructing a transparent output spent by a script that runs a valid OP_CHECKSIGVERIFY immediately before an OP_CHECKSIG with an undefined hash type.
  • The first opcode primes the C++ sighash buffer with a valid digest; the second causes Zebra's callback to return None while the C++ checker verifies the invalid signature against the stale digest.
  • Zebra accepts the spend, zcashd rejects it, creating a consensus split in the network.

Impact

Consensus Failure

  • Attack Vector: Network.
  • Effect: Network partition/consensus split.
  • Scope: Any affected Zebra node, and any miner or template pipeline that relies on Zebra's validation result.

Fixed Versions

This issue is fixed in 4.4.0.

The fixes uses a workaround where the input buffer is filled with random bytes on validation failure, which makes signature validation fail (as expected) with overwhelming probability. This avoids a breaking release of the zcash_script crate. A future release will propagate the error correctly for a direct fix.

Mitigation

Users should upgrade to 4.4.0 or later immediately.

There are no known workarounds for this issue. Immediate upgrade is the only way to ensure the node remains on the correct consensus path and is protected against malicious chain forks.

Credits

Zebra thanks @sangsoo-osec for finding and reporting the issue.

Affected Packages

2 total 2 fixed
EcosystemPackageVulnerable rangeFix
🦀crates.iozebra-scriptall versions6.0.0cargo update -p zebra-script --precise 6.0.0
🦀crates.iozebradall versions4.4.0cargo update -p zebrad --precise 4.4.0

Detection & mitigation playbook

Open-source dependency
  1. Detect

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

  2. Fix

    Update zebra-script to 6.0.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-gq4h-3grw-2rhv 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 GHSA-gq4h-3grw-2rhv can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.

Tailored to GHSA-gq4h-3grw-2rhv. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.

Frequently Asked Questions

# CVE-2026-44497: Consensus Divergence in Transparent Sighash Hash-Type Handling due to Stale Buffer ## Summary The fix for https://github.com/ZcashFoundation/zebra/security/advisories/GHSA-8m29-fpq5-89jj introduced a separate issue due to insuficient error handling of the case where the sighash type is invalid, during sighash computation. Instead of returning an error, the normal flow would resume, and the input sighash buffer would be left untouched. In scenarios where a previous signature validation could leave a valid sighash in the buffer, an invalid hash-type could be incorrectly accep
O3 Security · Impact-Aware SCA

Is GHSA-gq4h-3grw-2rhv in your dependencies?

O3 Security finds GHSA-gq4h-3grw-2rhv across crates.io dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.

GHSA-gq4h-3grw-2rhv: zebra-script | O3 Security