CVE-2025-47774: CWE-691: Insufficient Control Flow Management in vyperlang vyper
Vyper is the Pythonic Programming Language for the Ethereum Virtual Machine. In versions up to and including 0.4.2rc1, the `slice()` builtin can elide side effects when the output length is 0, and the source bytestring is a builtin (`msg.data` or `<address>.code`). The reason is that for these source locations, the check that `length >= 1` is skipped. The result is that a 0-length bytestring constructed with slice can be passed to `make_byte_array_copier`, which elides evaluation of its source argument when the max length is 0. The impact is that side effects in the `start` argument may be elided when the `length` argument is 0, e.g. `slice(msg.data, self.do_side_effect(), 0)`. The fix in pull request 4645 disallows any invocation of `slice()` with length 0, including for the ad hoc locations discussed in this advisory. The fix is expected to be part of version 0.4.2.
AI Analysis
Technical Summary
CVE-2025-47774 is a vulnerability identified in the Vyper programming language, which is a Pythonic language designed for writing smart contracts on the Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM). This vulnerability affects Vyper versions up to and including 0.4.2rc1. The core issue lies in the implementation of the built-in `slice()` function, specifically when it is used to create a zero-length bytestring from certain built-in source locations such as `msg.data` or `<address>.code`. Normally, when slicing bytestrings, side effects in the arguments should be evaluated to maintain correct program behavior. However, due to insufficient control flow management, the check that ensures the slice length is at least 1 is skipped for these built-in sources. Consequently, when `slice()` is called with a length of zero, the function `make_byte_array_copier` bypasses the evaluation of the source argument, which can cause side effects in the `start` argument to be elided. For example, an expression like `slice(msg.data, self.do_side_effect(), 0)` would not execute the side effect as intended. This behavior can lead to unexpected contract logic execution, potentially impacting the integrity of smart contracts. The vulnerability is classified under CWE-691 (Insufficient Control Flow Management). The fix, introduced in pull request 4645 and expected in version 0.4.2, disallows any invocation of `slice()` with a length of zero, including for the special built-in locations. The CVSS 4.0 base score is 2.9 (low severity), reflecting limited impact and exploitation complexity. There are no known exploits in the wild at this time.
Potential Impact
For European organizations involved in blockchain development, decentralized finance (DeFi), or any Ethereum-based smart contract deployment, this vulnerability could lead to subtle bugs in contract logic due to elided side effects. Although the direct impact on confidentiality, availability, or integrity is limited (as the vulnerability primarily affects control flow within contract code), it could cause contracts to behave unpredictably or fail to execute critical side effects, potentially resulting in financial loss or contract malfunction. Given the increasing adoption of Ethereum smart contracts in Europe, especially in fintech hubs and blockchain startups, the vulnerability could undermine trust in contract correctness if exploited or left unpatched. However, since exploitation requires crafting specific contract code and no remote exploitation vector exists, the risk is moderate. The low CVSS score aligns with this assessment. Organizations relying on Vyper for contract development should prioritize updating to patched versions to maintain contract reliability and avoid subtle logic errors.
Mitigation Recommendations
1. Upgrade to Vyper version 0.4.2 or later, where the vulnerability is fixed by disallowing zero-length slices. 2. Review existing smart contracts written in affected Vyper versions for usage of the `slice()` function with zero length, especially when used with `msg.data` or `<address>.code`, and refactor code to avoid reliance on side effects in slice arguments. 3. Implement thorough testing and auditing of smart contracts to detect unintended side effect elisions or control flow anomalies. 4. Use static analysis tools or linters that can flag suspicious `slice()` usage patterns in Vyper codebases. 5. Educate smart contract developers on this vulnerability to prevent introduction of similar logic errors in future code. 6. Monitor Vyper project updates and security advisories for any related issues or patches.
Affected Countries
Germany, France, Netherlands, Switzerland, United Kingdom, Estonia
CVE-2025-47774: CWE-691: Insufficient Control Flow Management in vyperlang vyper
Description
Vyper is the Pythonic Programming Language for the Ethereum Virtual Machine. In versions up to and including 0.4.2rc1, the `slice()` builtin can elide side effects when the output length is 0, and the source bytestring is a builtin (`msg.data` or `<address>.code`). The reason is that for these source locations, the check that `length >= 1` is skipped. The result is that a 0-length bytestring constructed with slice can be passed to `make_byte_array_copier`, which elides evaluation of its source argument when the max length is 0. The impact is that side effects in the `start` argument may be elided when the `length` argument is 0, e.g. `slice(msg.data, self.do_side_effect(), 0)`. The fix in pull request 4645 disallows any invocation of `slice()` with length 0, including for the ad hoc locations discussed in this advisory. The fix is expected to be part of version 0.4.2.
AI-Powered Analysis
Technical Analysis
CVE-2025-47774 is a vulnerability identified in the Vyper programming language, which is a Pythonic language designed for writing smart contracts on the Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM). This vulnerability affects Vyper versions up to and including 0.4.2rc1. The core issue lies in the implementation of the built-in `slice()` function, specifically when it is used to create a zero-length bytestring from certain built-in source locations such as `msg.data` or `<address>.code`. Normally, when slicing bytestrings, side effects in the arguments should be evaluated to maintain correct program behavior. However, due to insufficient control flow management, the check that ensures the slice length is at least 1 is skipped for these built-in sources. Consequently, when `slice()` is called with a length of zero, the function `make_byte_array_copier` bypasses the evaluation of the source argument, which can cause side effects in the `start` argument to be elided. For example, an expression like `slice(msg.data, self.do_side_effect(), 0)` would not execute the side effect as intended. This behavior can lead to unexpected contract logic execution, potentially impacting the integrity of smart contracts. The vulnerability is classified under CWE-691 (Insufficient Control Flow Management). The fix, introduced in pull request 4645 and expected in version 0.4.2, disallows any invocation of `slice()` with a length of zero, including for the special built-in locations. The CVSS 4.0 base score is 2.9 (low severity), reflecting limited impact and exploitation complexity. There are no known exploits in the wild at this time.
Potential Impact
For European organizations involved in blockchain development, decentralized finance (DeFi), or any Ethereum-based smart contract deployment, this vulnerability could lead to subtle bugs in contract logic due to elided side effects. Although the direct impact on confidentiality, availability, or integrity is limited (as the vulnerability primarily affects control flow within contract code), it could cause contracts to behave unpredictably or fail to execute critical side effects, potentially resulting in financial loss or contract malfunction. Given the increasing adoption of Ethereum smart contracts in Europe, especially in fintech hubs and blockchain startups, the vulnerability could undermine trust in contract correctness if exploited or left unpatched. However, since exploitation requires crafting specific contract code and no remote exploitation vector exists, the risk is moderate. The low CVSS score aligns with this assessment. Organizations relying on Vyper for contract development should prioritize updating to patched versions to maintain contract reliability and avoid subtle logic errors.
Mitigation Recommendations
1. Upgrade to Vyper version 0.4.2 or later, where the vulnerability is fixed by disallowing zero-length slices. 2. Review existing smart contracts written in affected Vyper versions for usage of the `slice()` function with zero length, especially when used with `msg.data` or `<address>.code`, and refactor code to avoid reliance on side effects in slice arguments. 3. Implement thorough testing and auditing of smart contracts to detect unintended side effect elisions or control flow anomalies. 4. Use static analysis tools or linters that can flag suspicious `slice()` usage patterns in Vyper codebases. 5. Educate smart contract developers on this vulnerability to prevent introduction of similar logic errors in future code. 6. Monitor Vyper project updates and security advisories for any related issues or patches.
Affected Countries
For access to advanced analysis and higher rate limits, contact root@offseq.com
Technical Details
- Data Version
- 5.1
- Assigner Short Name
- GitHub_M
- Date Reserved
- 2025-05-09T19:49:35.619Z
- Cisa Enriched
- true
- Cvss Version
- 4.0
- State
- PUBLISHED
Threat ID: 682cd0fa1484d88663aec464
Added to database: 5/20/2025, 6:59:06 PM
Last enriched: 7/12/2025, 1:01:09 AM
Last updated: 7/28/2025, 4:04:50 AM
Views: 7
Related Threats
CVE-2025-55279: CWE-798: Use of Hard-coded Credentials in ZKTeco Co WL20 Biometric Attendance System
MediumCVE-2025-54465: CWE-798: Use of Hard-coded Credentials in ZKTeco Co WL20 Biometric Attendance System
MediumCVE-2025-54464: CWE-312: Cleartext Storage of Sensitive Information in ZKTeco Co WL20 Biometric Attendance System
HighCVE-2025-2713: CWE-269 Improper Privilege Management in Google gVisor
MediumCVE-2025-8916: CWE-770 Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling in Legion of the Bouncy Castle Inc. Bouncy Castle for Java
MediumActions
Updates to AI analysis are available only with a Pro account. Contact root@offseq.com for access.
Need enhanced features?
Contact root@offseq.com for Pro access with improved analysis and higher rate limits.