GHSA-j3px-q95c-9683 — zlib-rs
MEDIUMGHSA-j3px-q95c-9683 is a medium-severity (CVSS 5.3) remote code execution vulnerability in zlib-rs. A fix is available for zlib-rs — see the affected versions and patch details below.
zlib-rs stack overflow during decompression with malicious input
Real-World Exposure
zlib-rs🦀libz-rs-sys🦀libz-rs-sys-cdylibReal-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
A denial of service vulnerability was found in zlib-rs, triggered by specially constructed input. This input causes a stack overflow, resulting in the process using zlib-rs to crash.
Impact
Due to the way LLVM handles the zlib-rs codebase, tail calls were not guaranteed. This caused certain input patterns to result in a large number of stack frames being required, quickly resulting in a stack overflow. These are unlikely to occur in practice, but a dedicated attacker can construct malicious input files.
After stack overflows were found by @inahga with a fuzzer, we dove into the assembly, and found some cases where the stack grew
.LBB109_326:
mov rdi, rbx
call zlib_rs::inflate::State::type_do
jmp .LBB109_311
.LBB109_311:
lea rsp, [rbp - 40]
pop rbx
pop r12
pop r13
pop r14
pop r15
pop rbp
.cfi_def_cfa rsp, 8
ret
LLVM wants to centralize the cleanup before the return (many other blocks jump to LBB109_311), thereby invalidating a tail call to type_do. We were not able to get rid of this call without introducing one elsewhere: we just don't currently have the power to tell LLVM what we want it to do.
So, we switch back to loop+match waiting for changes to rust to make a more efficient implementation possible. Performance-wise, the damage is relatively minimal: we're just slower in cases where we already were slower than C. We are faster in cases where the relevant code is barely touched (in these cases the logic quickly moves into a hot inner loop and just spends most of its time there).
Patches
Version 0.4.0 patches the problem and is no longer vulnerable.
Workarounds
Users of zlib-rs should upgrade to the latest version. Users could alternatively run zlib-rs in a separate process to prevent a stack overflow crashing the entire program. In some situations a signal handler can be used to catch a stack overflow happening.
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🦀crates.io | zlib-rs | all versions | 0.4.0cargo update -p zlib-rs --precise 0.4.0 |
| 🦀crates.io | libz-rs-sys | all versions | 0.4.0cargo update -p libz-rs-sys --precise 0.4.0 |
| 🦀crates.io | libz-rs-sys-cdylib | all versions | 0.4.0cargo update -p libz-rs-sys-cdylib --precise 0.4.0 |
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for zlib-rs, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update zlib-rs to 0.4.0 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-j3px-q95c-9683 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 GHSA-j3px-q95c-9683 can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.
Tailored to GHSA-j3px-q95c-9683. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is GHSA-j3px-q95c-9683 in your dependencies?
O3 Security finds GHSA-j3px-q95c-9683 across crates.io dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.