Skip to content

Zebra has Permanent Block Discovery Halt via Gossip Queue Saturation and Syncer Poisoning

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published May 5, 2026 in ZcashFoundation/zebra • Updated May 18, 2026

Package

cargo zebrad (Rust)

Affected versions

< 4.4.0

Patched versions

4.4.0

Description

Summary

A composite denial-of-service vulnerability in Zebra's block discovery pipeline allows an unauthenticated remote attacker to permanently halt all new block discovery on a targeted node. The attack exploits three independent weaknesses in the gossip, syncer, and download subsystems — all exercisable from a single TCP connection — to create a monotonically growing block deficit that never self-heals.

Severity

Critical — This is a Denial of Service vulnerability that requires no authentication, no special privileges, and only a single peer connection. The halt is permanent: the node will never recover without operator intervention.

Affected Versions

All Zebra versions prior to 4.4.0.

Description

Zebra discovers new blocks through two complementary paths: a gossip path (peers announce blocks via inv messages, triggering individual block downloads) and a syncer path (Zebra periodically queries peers with FindBlocks/FindHeaders to discover chains of missing blocks). Both paths must function for normal operation.

The gossip path was vulnerable because there was no per-connection rate limit on inv messages. A single connection could send enough sequential inv messages with fake block hashes to fill the entire gossip download queue in under a millisecond. The FullQueue return value was silently ignored, so legitimate block announcements from honest peers were dropped with no warning.

The syncer backup path could be degraded by responding with empty inv to FindBlocks requests and with NotFound to block download requests. Both are valid protocol responses that carried zero misbehavior penalty. The attacker's connection was never banned and never disconnected, allowing the degradation to persist indefinitely.

Combining these two vectors, an attacker could suppress both block discovery paths simultaneously from a single connection, causing the node to fall permanently behind the chain tip.

Impact

Denial of Service

  • Attack Vector: Network, unauthenticated. Requires only a single TCP peer connection.
  • Effect: Permanent halt of block discovery. The targeted node falls behind the chain tip and never recovers without operator intervention.
  • Scope: Any Zebra node reachable by the attacker over the peer-to-peer network.

Fixed Versions

This issue is fixed in Zebra 4.4.0.

The fix drops connections that send empty responses to FindBlocks and FindHeaders messages, preventing attackers from degrading the syncer path without consequence.

Mitigation

Users should upgrade to Zebra 4.4.0 or later immediately.

There are no known workarounds for this issue. Immediate upgrade is the only way to protect against this attack.

Credits

Zebra the researcher who reported this issue through the coordinated disclosure process.

References

@mpguerra mpguerra published to ZcashFoundation/zebra May 5, 2026
Published by the National Vulnerability Database May 8, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database May 8, 2026
Reviewed May 8, 2026
Last updated May 18, 2026

Severity

High

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector Network
Attack Complexity Low
Attack Requirements None
Privileges Required None
User interaction None
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability High
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability None

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector: This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. This metric value (and consequently the resulting severity) will be larger the more remote (logically, and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerable system. The assumption is that the number of potential attackers for a vulnerability that could be exploited from across a network is larger than the number of potential attackers that could exploit a vulnerability requiring physical access to a device, and therefore warrants a greater severity.
Attack Complexity: This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. These are conditions whose primary purpose is to increase security and/or increase exploit engineering complexity. A vulnerability exploitable without a target-specific variable has a lower complexity than a vulnerability that would require non-trivial customization. This metric is meant to capture security mechanisms utilized by the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These differ from security-enhancing techniques/technologies (ref Attack Complexity) as the primary purpose of these conditions is not to explicitly mitigate attacks, but rather, emerge naturally as a consequence of the deployment and execution of the vulnerable system.
Privileges Required: This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. The method by which the attacker obtains privileged credentials prior to the attack (e.g., free trial accounts), is outside the scope of this metric. Generally, self-service provisioned accounts do not constitute a privilege requirement if the attacker can grant themselves privileges as part of the attack.
User interaction: This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable system. This metric determines whether the vulnerability can be exploited solely at the will of the attacker, or whether a separate user (or user-initiated process) must participate in some manner.
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the VULNERABLE SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(35th percentile)

Weaknesses

Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling

The product allocates a reusable resource or group of resources on behalf of an actor without imposing any intended restrictions on the size or number of resources that can be allocated. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-44499

GHSA ID

GHSA-h9hm-m2xj-4rq9

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.
⚡