CVE-2025-54070VulnerabilityPublished 17 Jul 2025

CVE-2025-54070: openzeppelin-contracts · Out-of-bounds Read

Affects openzeppelin-contractsSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.9 Medium : upgrade to 5.4.0 when convenient.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

6.9Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.3% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 33% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 5.4.0

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None
Vulnerable system integrity: Low
Vulnerable system availability: Low
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable system is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed below, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed “remotely exploitable” and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the Vulnerable System are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 17 Jul 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 2026-10-25.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Upgrade openzeppelin/openzeppelin-contracts to 5.4.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubopenzeppelin/openzeppelin-contracts`pkg:github/openzeppelin/openzeppelin-contracts`Other threats	Affected >=5.2.0 <5.4.0	Fixed in 5.4.0

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

European organizations should immediately upgrade all instances of OpenZeppelin Contracts to version 5.4.0 or later to incorporate the official patch addressing this vulnerability. Beyond upgrading, developers must conduct thorough code reviews and audits of smart contracts that utilize the lastIndexOf function to ensure that returned indices are validated against buffer boundaries before any memory access. Implementing defensive programming practices such as explicit bounds checking and fail-safe error handling will mitigate risks of undefined behavior. Additionally, organizations should integrate static analysis tools specialized for smart contracts to detect unsafe memory access patterns. For deployed contracts that cannot be upgraded, consider deploying wrapper contracts or patches that validate inputs and outputs of vulnerable functions. Monitoring blockchain transactions for anomalous patterns targeting the affected function can provide early warning of exploitation attempts. Finally, educating development teams about secure smart contract coding standards and the importance of dependency management will reduce future vulnerabilities.

Description

OpenZeppelin Contracts is a library for secure smart contract development. Starting in version 5.2.0 and prior to version 5.4.0, the `lastIndexOf(bytes,byte,uint256)` function of the `Bytes.sol` library may access uninitialized memory when the following two conditions hold: 1) the provided buffer length is empty (i.e. `buffer.length == 0`) and position is not `2**256 - 1` (i.e. `pos != type(uint256).max`). The `pos` argument could be used to access arbitrary data outside of the buffer bounds. This could lead to the operation running out of gas, or returning an invalid index (outside of the empty buffer). Processing this invalid result for accessing the `buffer` would cause a revert under normal conditions. When triggered, the function reads memory at offset `buffer + 0x20 + pos`. If memory at that location (outside the `buffer`) matches the search pattern, the function would return an out of bound index instead of the expected `type(uint256).max`. This creates unexpected behavior where callers receive a valid-looking index pointing outside buffer bounds. Subsequent memory accesses that don't check bounds and use the returned index must carefully review the potential impact depending on their setup. Code relying on this function returning `type(uint256).max` for empty buffers or using the returned index without bounds checking could exhibit undefined behavior. Users should upgrade to version 5.4.0 to receive a patch.

Impact

For European organizations utilizing blockchain technologies, decentralized finance (DeFi) platforms, or other smart contract-based applications that incorporate OpenZeppelin Contracts, this vulnerability poses a risk of unexpected contract failures or logical errors. Such failures could disrupt financial transactions, automated workflows, or token management processes, potentially leading to financial losses or reputational damage. Given the widespread adoption of OpenZeppelin Contracts in the Ethereum ecosystem, many European fintech companies, blockchain startups, and enterprises integrating smart contracts could be affected. The out-of-bounds read itself does not directly lead to data leakage or privilege escalation but can cause contract reverts or inconsistent state changes, impacting availability and integrity of smart contract operations. This could undermine trust in blockchain applications and delay critical business processes. Additionally, attackers might exploit this flaw to craft transactions that intentionally cause contract failures, resulting in denial of service conditions or manipulation of contract logic if bounds checks are insufficient. The impact is particularly relevant for high-value contracts or those handling sensitive operations such as asset custody, automated trading, or identity verification within European jurisdictions.

CWE-125Out-of-bounds Read (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessCWE Top 25 (2025): #8
The product reads data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
Architecture and Design · Language Selection
Use a language that provides appropriate memory abstractions.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Overread Buffers (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 17 Jul 2025, 18:47 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-125

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats