VulnerabilityPublished 30 Oct 2026

CVE-2026-61694: LeJamon go-xrpl · Integer Overflow or Wraparound

Affects LeJamon go-xrplSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 3.7 Low.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 20:38 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

3.7Low

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

Thin evidence

One scorer or none

CVSS scores by source
CNA (GitHub_M)	CVSS 3.1	3.7

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:N

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: High
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: Low
Availability: None

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, 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: High: A successful attack depends on conditions beyond the attacker's control. That is, a successful attack cannot be accomplished at will, but requires the attacker to invest in some measurable amount of effort in preparation or execution against the vulnerable component before a successful attack can be expected. For example, a successful attack may require an attacker to: gather knowledge about the environment in which the vulnerable target/component exists; prepare the target environment to improve exploit reliability; or inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim in order to read and/or modify network communications (e.g., a man in the middle attack).
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
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 on the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 30 Oct 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: 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 30 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.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
LeJamongo-xrpl	Affected <=0.0.0-20260618134614-cb77d640ee26	Fixed in–
Gogithub.com/lejamon/go-xrpl`pkg:golang/github.com/lejamon/go-xrpl`Other threats	Affected <=0.0.0-20260618134614-cb77d640ee26	Fixed in–

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

AI-suggested

A source code fix is available in commit 9dbd3935ed6c54f0232f2291edf9c012a0900dd5. Users of go-xrpl should update to the fixed version incorporating this commit to prevent integer overflow issues in amount parsing. No other mitigation or workaround is indicated.

Description

CVE-2026-61694 is an integer overflow vulnerability in the LeJamon go-xrpl library, a Go implementation of the XRP Ledger protocol. The flaw occurs in the function ParseMPTAmountBinary, which converts an eight-byte magnitude to int64 without checking for overflow, causing large positive values to wrap into negative numbers silently. This leads to incorrect escrow amount calculations and divergence from the reference rippled implementation. Another related internal decoder accepts over-limit magnitudes without enforcing 64-bit signed integer limits, creating inconsistencies. A source code fix is available in a specific commit.

Impact

The integer overflow causes incorrect interpretation of large escrow amounts, potentially leading to incorrect financial calculations within applications using go-xrpl. The impact is limited to integrity (incorrect data processing) without confidentiality or availability effects. The CVSS score of 3.7 (low) reflects the limited impact and the requirement for network attack vector with high attack complexity and no privileges or user interaction.

Summary

The vulnerability in go-xrpl affects the internal parsing of XRP Ledger amounts. Specifically, ParseMPTAmountBinary uses num.Int64() on an 8-byte magnitude without verifying it fits within 63 bits, allowing a positive magnitude ≥ 2^63 to wrap into a negative value without error. This impacts escrow amount parsing, causing incorrect downstream calculations and divergence from the rippled reference implementation. Additionally, readMPTAmount accepts magnitudes exceeding the signed 64-bit limit, producing large decimal strings without enforcement. The public codec rejects such values, but internal decoders are inconsistent. A source fix is committed to address these issues.

CWE-190Integer Overflow or Wraparound (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: Medium
The product performs a calculation that can produce an integer overflow or wraparound when the logic assumes that the resulting value will always be larger than the original value. This occurs when an integer value is incremented to a value that is too large to store in the associated representation. When this occurs, the value may become a very small or negative number.
Requirements
Ensure that all protocols are strictly defined, such that all out-of-bounds behavior can be identified simply, and require strict conformance to the protocol.
Requirements · Language Selection
Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.4.3 (opens in a new tab)
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Forced Integer Overflow (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 30 Oct 2026, 20:04 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-190

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats