Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

CVE-2024-7254 vulnerability found in dependency #2804

Closed
2 tasks done
RonyOCuinn opened this issue Feb 19, 2025 · 3 comments
Closed
2 tasks done

CVE-2024-7254 vulnerability found in dependency #2804

RonyOCuinn opened this issue Feb 19, 2025 · 3 comments

Comments

@RonyOCuinn
Copy link

RonyOCuinn commented Feb 19, 2025

General Troubleshooting

  • I have checked for similar issues on the Issue-tracker.
  • I have checked for PRs that might already address this issue.

Version of JDA

5.3.0

Expected Behaviour

IntelliJ alerts to say that CVE-2024-7254 is present in the protobuf-java library:

Dependency maven:com.google.protobuf:protobuf-java:3.25.3 is vulnerable

Upgrade to 4.28.2

CVE-2024-7254, Score: 7.5

Any project that parses untrusted Protocol Buffers data containing an arbitrary number of nested groups / series of SGROUP tags can corrupted by exceeding the stack limit i.e. StackOverflow. Parsing nested groups as unknown fields with DiscardUnknownFieldsParser or Java Protobuf Lite parser, or against Protobuf map fields, creates unbounded recursions that can be abused by an attacker.

Read More: https://www.mend.io/vulnerability-database/CVE-2024-7254?utm_source=JetBrains

Results powered by Mend.io

Code Example for Reproduction Steps

N/A

Code for JDABuilder or DefaultShardManagerBuilder used

N/A

Exception or Error

N/A
@freya022
Copy link
Contributor

Already fixed with #2760

@Andre601
Copy link
Contributor

Andre601 commented Feb 19, 2025

The linked PR also contains comments adressing an important question for every CVE you could encounter: Is it actually an issue in JDA?

Some CVEs may never be an issue in JDA as it will never be triggered the way it gets described. The issue here with protobuf is especially not an issue, as you apparently can run JDA without it given it's a transitive dependency and not actively used by JDA itself.

@RonyOCuinn
Copy link
Author

Apologies, I did a ctrl + f for the CVE number in the title of open PRs, I should have done an actual search. Closing!

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants