GHSA-q8j9-34qf-7vq7
MEDIUMSilver has unrestricted traffic between Wireguard clients
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.
Blast Radius
github.com/BishopFox/sliver🐹github.com/bishopfox/sliverReal-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
Summary
Sliver's custom Wireguard netstack doesn't limit traffic between Wireguard clients, this could lead to:
- Leaked/recovered keypair (from a beacon) being used to attack operators.
- Port forwardings usable from other implants.
Details
-
Sliver treat operators' Wireguard config and beacon/session's Wireguard config equally, they both connect to the wireguard listener created from the CLI.
-
The current netstack implementation does not filter traffic between clients. I think this piece of code handle traffic between clients, from experimental results clients can ping and connect to each other freely, and I didn't see any filtering here either:
File: server\c2\wireguard.go
246: func socketWGWriteEnvelope(connection net.Conn, envelope *sliverpb.Envelope) error {
247: data, err := proto.Marshal(envelope)
248: if err != nil {
249: wgLog.Errorf("Envelope marshaling error: %v", err)
250: return err
251: }
252: dataLengthBuf := new(bytes.Buffer)
253: binary.Write(dataLengthBuf, binary.LittleEndian, uint32(len(data)))
254: connection.Write(dataLengthBuf.Bytes())
255: connection.Write(data)
256: return nil
257: }
258:
-
The docs says to use a Wireguard clients and operator wg-config to connect to the same WG listener as beacons: https://sliver.sh/docs?name=Port%20Forwarding
-
If the operator uses official wireguard clients that integrates with the OS's netstack (I'm using the Windows client) then their services are accessible on the wireguard interface's IP address (for example 100.64.0.3) when the services listen on 0.0.0.0 (SSH, RDP, SMB, etc)
-
The beacon's wireguard private key can be recovered through a process dump or other forensic techniques.
-
When a private key is recovered, an attacker can connect to 100.64.0.1:1337 (key exchange listener) to generate new wireguard clients without the operators' knowledge, in that way achieve persistence inside the wireguard network.
PoC
Easy way:
- Create 2 operators wireguard config.
- Connect them both to the wireguard listener.
- From one machine, ping/scan/connect to the other's services like RDP (3389), SSH (22), etc.
Slightly complicated way:
-
From the operator's machine, connect to the wireguard listener.
-
On the attacker's machine, run a beacon.
-
Dump the process
-
Find the private key, public key, endpoint, etc in the dump file:
-
Construct a valid Wireguard config based on the strings found. On the attacker's machine, connect to the Wireguard listener.
-
Ping/scan/connect to the other's services like RDP (3389), SSH (22), etc.
Impact
The operator's machine is impacted, if their services contain a vulnerability, an attacker can exploit it and gain RCE. If not then it could be used to gather information (Hostname, SSH signature, etc).
Suggestion
- Filter traffic between clients with a default-deny policy.
- Differentiate between operators and beacons' wireguard config/client
- Only allow specific one-way traffic when the operator request to open a Wireguard port forward.
Vulnerable versions
All versions containing wireguard functionality.
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🐹Go | github.com/BishopFox/sliver | all versions | 1.5.44 |
| 🐹Go | github.com/bishopfox/sliver | all versions | 1.5.44 |
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for github.com/BishopFox/sliver. 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 github.com/BishopFox/sliver to 1.5.44 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-q8j9-34qf-7vq7 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-q8j9-34qf-7vq7 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-q8j9-34qf-7vq7. 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-q8j9-34qf-7vq7 in your dependencies?
O3 detects GHSA-q8j9-34qf-7vq7 across Go dependencies and uses function-level reachability to confirm whether the vulnerable code path is actually reachable — not just present. No false positives.