Skip to content

Comments

[GHSA-378v-28hj-76wf] bn.js affected by an infinite loop#7017

Closed
jochenschmich-aeberle wants to merge 1 commit intojochenschmich-aeberle/advisory-improvement-7017from
jochenschmich-aeberle-GHSA-378v-28hj-76wf
Closed

[GHSA-378v-28hj-76wf] bn.js affected by an infinite loop#7017
jochenschmich-aeberle wants to merge 1 commit intojochenschmich-aeberle/advisory-improvement-7017from
jochenschmich-aeberle-GHSA-378v-28hj-76wf

Conversation

@jochenschmich-aeberle
Copy link

Updates

  • Affected products
  • CVSS v3
  • CVSS v4
  • Description
  • References

Comments
4.12.3 also fixes the issue (see indutny/bn.js@67ecb35)

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings February 23, 2026 13:06
@github-actions github-actions bot changed the base branch from main to jochenschmich-aeberle/advisory-improvement-7017 February 23, 2026 13:07
Copy link

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

This pull request updates the security advisory for bn.js CVE-2026-2739 to reflect that version 4.12.3 also fixes the infinite loop vulnerability, in addition to the previously documented fix in version 5.2.3. The PR updates the affected version ranges, adds a reference to the 4.12.3 fix commit, updates the CVSS scoring, and removes the CVSS v3 score while keeping CVSS v4.

Changes:

  • Adds version 4.12.3 as an additional fixed version for the 4.x branch
  • Updates the vulnerability description to indicate both version branches are fixed
  • Adds a reference to the commit that fixes the issue in 4.12.3
  • Updates CVSS v4 score (removes Exploit Maturity metric)
  • Removes CVSS v3 score

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

Comment on lines 23 to 35
"ranges": [
{
"type": "ECOSYSTEM",
"events": [
{
"introduced": "0"
},
{
"fixed": "5.2.3"
}
]
}
]
Copy link

Copilot AI Feb 23, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The two affected package entries have overlapping version ranges, which is incorrect. Both entries specify "introduced": "0", which means they describe the same version range starting from the initial release.

According to the codebase convention (seen in similar advisories like GHSA-2453-mppf-46cj), when a vulnerability affects multiple major version branches of the same package, each entry should specify its own distinct major version range.

For bn.js, which has separate 4.x and 5.x major version branches, the entries should be:

  • Entry 1 for the 5.x branch should specify "introduced": "5.0.0" instead of "introduced": "0"
  • Entry 2 for the 4.x branch can keep "introduced": "0" (covering versions before 5.x)

This ensures non-overlapping, accurate version ranges for each affected branch.

Copilot uses AI. Check for mistakes.
{
"type": "CVSS_V4",
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P"
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N"
Copy link

Copilot AI Feb 23, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The CVSS v4 score has been modified to remove the Exploit Maturity metric (E:P). The original score was CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P, which indicated that a proof-of-concept exploit exists (E:P).

The updated score CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N removes this exploit maturity information. If a proof-of-concept exploit exists (as referenced in the gist and pull request), removing E:P makes the score less accurate. The Exploit Maturity metric should be retained to provide accurate threat assessment.

Suggested change
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N"
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P"

Copilot uses AI. Check for mistakes.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@copilot OK, thanks - revert this change - I've introduced it, because I would not be able to save the Advisory form otherwise - the original string was deemed invalid.

@github-actions github-actions bot deleted the jochenschmich-aeberle-GHSA-378v-28hj-76wf branch February 23, 2026 13:38
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant