CVE-2026-44497 (GCVE-0-2026-44497)
Vulnerability from cvelistv5 – Published: 2026-05-08 15:08 – Updated: 2026-05-08 15:48
VLAI?
Title
ZEBRA: Consensus Divergence in Transparent Sighash Hash-Type Handling due to Stale Buffer
Summary
ZEBRA is a Zcash node written entirely in Rust. Prior to zebrad version 4.4.0 and prior to zebra-script version 6.0.0, the fix for CVE-2026-41583 introduced a separate issue due to insufficient error handling of the case where the sighash type is invalid, during sighash computation. Instead of returning an error, the normal flow would resume, and the input sighash buffer would be left untouched. In scenarios where a previous signature validation could leave a valid sighash in the buffer, an invalid hash-type could be incorrectly accepted, which would create a consensus split between Zebra and zcashd nodes. This issue has been patched in zebrad version 4.4.0 and zebra-script version 6.0.0.
Severity ?
CWE
- CWE-347 - Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature
Assigner
References
| URL | Tags | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|||||
Impacted products
| Vendor | Product | Version | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ZcashFoundation | zebra |
Affected:
zebra-script < 6.0.0
Affected: zebrad < 4.4.0 |
{
"containers": {
"adp": [
{
"metrics": [
{
"other": {
"content": {
"id": "CVE-2026-44497",
"options": [
{
"Exploitation": "none"
},
{
"Automatable": "yes"
},
{
"Technical Impact": "partial"
}
],
"role": "CISA Coordinator",
"timestamp": "2026-05-08T15:47:45.909079Z",
"version": "2.0.3"
},
"type": "ssvc"
}
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-05-08T15:48:10.020Z",
"orgId": "134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0",
"shortName": "CISA-ADP"
},
"title": "CISA ADP Vulnrichment"
}
],
"cna": {
"affected": [
{
"product": "zebra",
"vendor": "ZcashFoundation",
"versions": [
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "zebra-script \u003c 6.0.0"
},
{
"status": "affected",
"version": "zebrad \u003c 4.4.0"
}
]
}
],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "ZEBRA is a Zcash node written entirely in Rust. Prior to zebrad version 4.4.0 and prior to zebra-script version 6.0.0, the fix for CVE-2026-41583 introduced a separate issue due to insufficient error handling of the case where the sighash type is invalid, during sighash computation. Instead of returning an error, the normal flow would resume, and the input sighash buffer would be left untouched. In scenarios where a previous signature validation could leave a valid sighash in the buffer, an invalid hash-type could be incorrectly accepted, which would create a consensus split between Zebra and zcashd nodes. This issue has been patched in zebrad version 4.4.0 and zebra-script version 6.0.0."
}
],
"metrics": [
{
"cvssV4_0": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackRequirements": "NONE",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"baseScore": 9.3,
"baseSeverity": "CRITICAL",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"subAvailabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"subConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"subIntegrityImpact": "HIGH",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:H/SA:H",
"version": "4.0",
"vulnAvailabilityImpact": "HIGH",
"vulnConfidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"vulnIntegrityImpact": "HIGH"
}
}
],
"problemTypes": [
{
"descriptions": [
{
"cweId": "CWE-347",
"description": "CWE-347: Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature",
"lang": "en",
"type": "CWE"
}
]
}
],
"providerMetadata": {
"dateUpdated": "2026-05-08T15:08:08.516Z",
"orgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"shortName": "GitHub_M"
},
"references": [
{
"name": "https://github.com/ZcashFoundation/zebra/security/advisories/GHSA-gq4h-3grw-2rhv",
"tags": [
"x_refsource_CONFIRM"
],
"url": "https://github.com/ZcashFoundation/zebra/security/advisories/GHSA-gq4h-3grw-2rhv"
}
],
"source": {
"advisory": "GHSA-gq4h-3grw-2rhv",
"discovery": "UNKNOWN"
},
"title": "ZEBRA: Consensus Divergence in Transparent Sighash Hash-Type Handling due to Stale Buffer"
}
},
"cveMetadata": {
"assignerOrgId": "a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa",
"assignerShortName": "GitHub_M",
"cveId": "CVE-2026-44497",
"datePublished": "2026-05-08T15:08:08.516Z",
"dateReserved": "2026-05-06T18:28:20.886Z",
"dateUpdated": "2026-05-08T15:48:10.020Z",
"state": "PUBLISHED"
},
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2",
"vulnerability-lookup:meta": {
"epss": {
"cve": "CVE-2026-44497",
"date": "2026-05-09",
"epss": "0.00038",
"percentile": "0.11464"
},
"nvd": "{\"cve\":{\"id\":\"CVE-2026-44497\",\"sourceIdentifier\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"published\":\"2026-05-08T15:17:01.493\",\"lastModified\":\"2026-05-08T18:42:24.100\",\"vulnStatus\":\"Analyzed\",\"cveTags\":[],\"descriptions\":[{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"ZEBRA is a Zcash node written entirely in Rust. Prior to zebrad version 4.4.0 and prior to zebra-script version 6.0.0, the fix for CVE-2026-41583 introduced a separate issue due to insufficient error handling of the case where the sighash type is invalid, during sighash computation. Instead of returning an error, the normal flow would resume, and the input sighash buffer would be left untouched. In scenarios where a previous signature validation could leave a valid sighash in the buffer, an invalid hash-type could be incorrectly accepted, which would create a consensus split between Zebra and zcashd nodes. This issue has been patched in zebrad version 4.4.0 and zebra-script version 6.0.0.\"}],\"metrics\":{\"cvssMetricV40\":[{\"source\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"type\":\"Secondary\",\"cvssData\":{\"version\":\"4.0\",\"vectorString\":\"CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:H/SA:H/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X\",\"baseScore\":9.3,\"baseSeverity\":\"CRITICAL\",\"attackVector\":\"NETWORK\",\"attackComplexity\":\"LOW\",\"attackRequirements\":\"NONE\",\"privilegesRequired\":\"NONE\",\"userInteraction\":\"NONE\",\"vulnConfidentialityImpact\":\"NONE\",\"vulnIntegrityImpact\":\"HIGH\",\"vulnAvailabilityImpact\":\"HIGH\",\"subConfidentialityImpact\":\"NONE\",\"subIntegrityImpact\":\"HIGH\",\"subAvailabilityImpact\":\"HIGH\",\"exploitMaturity\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"confidentialityRequirement\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"integrityRequirement\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"availabilityRequirement\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedAttackVector\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedAttackComplexity\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedAttackRequirements\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedPrivilegesRequired\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedUserInteraction\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedVulnConfidentialityImpact\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedVulnIntegrityImpact\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedVulnAvailabilityImpact\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedSubConfidentialityImpact\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedSubIntegrityImpact\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"modifiedSubAvailabilityImpact\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"Safety\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"Automatable\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"Recovery\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"valueDensity\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"vulnerabilityResponseEffort\":\"NOT_DEFINED\",\"providerUrgency\":\"NOT_DEFINED\"}}],\"cvssMetricV31\":[{\"source\":\"nvd@nist.gov\",\"type\":\"Primary\",\"cvssData\":{\"version\":\"3.1\",\"vectorString\":\"CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H\",\"baseScore\":9.1,\"baseSeverity\":\"CRITICAL\",\"attackVector\":\"NETWORK\",\"attackComplexity\":\"LOW\",\"privilegesRequired\":\"NONE\",\"userInteraction\":\"NONE\",\"scope\":\"UNCHANGED\",\"confidentialityImpact\":\"NONE\",\"integrityImpact\":\"HIGH\",\"availabilityImpact\":\"HIGH\"},\"exploitabilityScore\":3.9,\"impactScore\":5.2}]},\"weaknesses\":[{\"source\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"type\":\"Primary\",\"description\":[{\"lang\":\"en\",\"value\":\"CWE-347\"}]}],\"configurations\":[{\"nodes\":[{\"operator\":\"OR\",\"negate\":false,\"cpeMatch\":[{\"vulnerable\":true,\"criteria\":\"cpe:2.3:a:zfnd:zebra-script:*:*:*:*:*:rust:*:*\",\"versionEndExcluding\":\"6.0.0\",\"matchCriteriaId\":\"DC9822C9-0E73-4C7D-9AEA-8DF32395B976\"},{\"vulnerable\":true,\"criteria\":\"cpe:2.3:a:zfnd:zebrad:*:*:*:*:*:rust:*:*\",\"versionEndExcluding\":\"4.4.0\",\"matchCriteriaId\":\"23232F98-CB60-4B90-B46A-430E3E1CE10B\"}]}]}],\"references\":[{\"url\":\"https://github.com/ZcashFoundation/zebra/security/advisories/GHSA-gq4h-3grw-2rhv\",\"source\":\"security-advisories@github.com\",\"tags\":[\"Vendor Advisory\"]}]}}",
"vulnrichment": {
"containers": "{\"adp\": [{\"title\": \"CISA ADP Vulnrichment\", \"metrics\": [{\"other\": {\"type\": \"ssvc\", \"content\": {\"id\": \"CVE-2026-44497\", \"role\": \"CISA Coordinator\", \"options\": [{\"Exploitation\": \"none\"}, {\"Automatable\": \"yes\"}, {\"Technical Impact\": \"partial\"}], \"version\": \"2.0.3\", \"timestamp\": \"2026-05-08T15:47:45.909079Z\"}}}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0\", \"shortName\": \"CISA-ADP\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-05-08T15:48:03.193Z\"}}], \"cna\": {\"title\": \"ZEBRA: Consensus Divergence in Transparent Sighash Hash-Type Handling due to Stale Buffer\", \"source\": {\"advisory\": \"GHSA-gq4h-3grw-2rhv\", \"discovery\": \"UNKNOWN\"}, \"metrics\": [{\"cvssV4_0\": {\"version\": \"4.0\", \"baseScore\": 9.3, \"attackVector\": \"NETWORK\", \"baseSeverity\": \"CRITICAL\", \"vectorString\": \"CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:H/SA:H\", \"userInteraction\": \"NONE\", \"attackComplexity\": \"LOW\", \"attackRequirements\": \"NONE\", \"privilegesRequired\": \"NONE\", \"subIntegrityImpact\": \"HIGH\", \"vulnIntegrityImpact\": \"HIGH\", \"subAvailabilityImpact\": \"HIGH\", \"vulnAvailabilityImpact\": \"HIGH\", \"subConfidentialityImpact\": \"NONE\", \"vulnConfidentialityImpact\": \"NONE\"}}], \"affected\": [{\"vendor\": \"ZcashFoundation\", \"product\": \"zebra\", \"versions\": [{\"status\": \"affected\", \"version\": \"zebra-script \u003c 6.0.0\"}, {\"status\": \"affected\", \"version\": \"zebrad \u003c 4.4.0\"}]}], \"references\": [{\"url\": \"https://github.com/ZcashFoundation/zebra/security/advisories/GHSA-gq4h-3grw-2rhv\", \"name\": \"https://github.com/ZcashFoundation/zebra/security/advisories/GHSA-gq4h-3grw-2rhv\", \"tags\": [\"x_refsource_CONFIRM\"]}], \"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"value\": \"ZEBRA is a Zcash node written entirely in Rust. Prior to zebrad version 4.4.0 and prior to zebra-script version 6.0.0, the fix for CVE-2026-41583 introduced a separate issue due to insufficient error handling of the case where the sighash type is invalid, during sighash computation. Instead of returning an error, the normal flow would resume, and the input sighash buffer would be left untouched. In scenarios where a previous signature validation could leave a valid sighash in the buffer, an invalid hash-type could be incorrectly accepted, which would create a consensus split between Zebra and zcashd nodes. This issue has been patched in zebrad version 4.4.0 and zebra-script version 6.0.0.\"}], \"problemTypes\": [{\"descriptions\": [{\"lang\": \"en\", \"type\": \"CWE\", \"cweId\": \"CWE-347\", \"description\": \"CWE-347: Improper Verification of Cryptographic Signature\"}]}], \"providerMetadata\": {\"orgId\": \"a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa\", \"shortName\": \"GitHub_M\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-05-08T15:08:08.516Z\"}}}",
"cveMetadata": "{\"cveId\": \"CVE-2026-44497\", \"state\": \"PUBLISHED\", \"dateUpdated\": \"2026-05-08T15:48:10.020Z\", \"dateReserved\": \"2026-05-06T18:28:20.886Z\", \"assignerOrgId\": \"a0819718-46f1-4df5-94e2-005712e83aaa\", \"datePublished\": \"2026-05-08T15:08:08.516Z\", \"assignerShortName\": \"GitHub_M\"}",
"dataType": "CVE_RECORD",
"dataVersion": "5.2"
}
}
}
Loading…
Loading…
Experimental. This forecast is provided for visualization only and may change without notice. Do not use it for operational decisions.
Forecast uses a logistic model when the trend is rising, or an exponential decay model when the trend is falling. Fitted via linearized least squares.
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date | Other |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Loading…
Loading…