VulnerabilityPublished 28 Jul 2025

CVE-2025-54429: polkadot-evm frontier · Incorrect Type Conversion or Cast

Affects polkadot-evm frontierSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.9 Medium : upgrade to 0822030 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

6.9Medium

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

EPSS: 0.5% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 42% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 0822030

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:L/VA:N/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: None
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: None: There is no impact to availability within 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 28 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 26 Oct 2026.

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 or the CVSS exploit maturity 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 polkadot-evm/frontier to 0822030.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubpolkadot-evm/frontier`pkg:github/polkadot-evm/frontier`Other threats	Affected <0822030	Fixed in 0822030

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 promptly upgrade their Polkadot Frontier deployments to version 0822030 or later to incorporate the fix for this vulnerability. For teams developing custom precompiles, a thorough code audit should be conducted to verify correct usage of AddressType distinctions, ensuring that contract addresses created via CREATE and CREATE2 are properly identified as contracts rather than EOAs. Additionally, implement rigorous testing of precompile accessibility rules to prevent unintended invocation paths. Organizations should also monitor their blockchain nodes and smart contract interactions for anomalous behavior indicative of exploitation attempts. Employing runtime monitoring and alerting on contract calls that violate expected address type constraints can provide early detection. Finally, maintain close alignment with Polkadot and Substrate community advisories and security updates to stay informed of related vulnerabilities and patches.

Description

Polkadot Frontier is an Ethereum and EVM compatibility layer for Polkadot and Substrate. There are various account address types in Frontier, e.g.precompiled contracts, smart contracts, and externally owned accounts. Some EVM mechanisms should be unreachable by certain types of accounts for safety. For precompiles to be callable by smart contracts they must be explicitly configured as CallableByContract. If this configuration is absent, then the precompile should be unreachable via smart contract accounts. In commits prior to 0822030, the underlying implementation of CallableByContract which returned the AddressType was incorrect. It considered the contract address running under CREATE or CREATE2 to be AddressType::EOA rather than correctly as AddressType::Contract. The issue only affects users who use custom precompile implementations that utilize AddressType::EOA and AddressType::Contract. It's not directly exploitable in any of the predefined precompiles in Frontier. This is fixed in version 0822030.

Impact

For European organizations utilizing Polkadot or Substrate-based blockchain solutions with the Frontier EVM compatibility layer, this vulnerability could lead to unintended execution paths in custom precompiled contracts. While the predefined precompiles are not affected, organizations that develop or deploy custom precompiles relying on address type distinctions may face risks of unauthorized contract calls or bypassing intended access controls. This could compromise the integrity of smart contract operations, potentially leading to logic errors or unauthorized asset transfers within blockchain applications. Given the growing adoption of blockchain technologies in Europe for finance, supply chain, and decentralized applications, such vulnerabilities could undermine trust and operational stability. However, the impact is limited to those using vulnerable versions and custom precompiles, reducing the overall risk surface. The lack of known exploits and the medium severity rating suggest a moderate but non-negligible threat to blockchain-based services in Europe.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 28 Jul 2025, 21:02 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-704

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats