Summary
The fuels-ts typescript SDK has no awareness of to-be-spent transactions
Brief/Intro
The typescript SDK has no awareness of to-be-spent transactions causing some transactions to fail or silently get pruned as they are funded with already used UTXOs.
The Typescript SDK provides the fund function which retrieves UTXOs, which belong to the owner and can be used to fund the request in question, from fuel's graphql api. These then get added to the request making it possible to send it to the network as it now has inputs which can be spent by its outputs. Now this works when a user only wants to fund one transaction per block as in the next block, the spent UTXO will not exist anymore. However if a user wants to fund multiple transactions within one block, the following can happen:
It is important to note, that the graphql API will return a random UTXO which has enough value to fund the transaction in question.
- user has 2 spendable
UTXOsin their wallet which can cover all expenses - user funds transaction
tAwith an input gotten from the APIiA - user submits
tAto fuel iAis still in possession of the user as no new block has been produced- user funds a transaction
tBand gets the same inputiAfrom the API - user tries to submit transaction
tBto fuel but now one of the following can happen:- if the recipient and all other parameters are the same as in
tA, submission will fail astBwill have the sametxHashastA - if the parameters are different, there will be a collision in the
txpoolandtAwill be removed from thetxpool
- if the recipient and all other parameters are the same as in
Vulnerability Details
The problem occurs, because the fund function in fuels-ts/packages/account/src/account.ts gets the needed ressources statelessly with the function getResourcesToSpend without taking into consideration already used UTXOs:
async fund<T extends TransactionRequest>(request: T, params: EstimatedTxParams): Promise<T> {
// [...]
let missingQuantities: CoinQuantity[] = [];
Object.entries(quantitiesDict).forEach(([assetId, { owned, required }]) => {
if (owned.lt(required)) {
missingQuantities.push({
assetId,
amount: required.sub(owned),
});
}
});
let needsToBeFunded = missingQuantities.length > 0;
let fundingAttempts = 0;
while (needsToBeFunded && fundingAttempts < MAX_FUNDING_ATTEMPTS) {
const resources = await this.getResourcesToSpend(
missingQuantities,
cacheRequestInputsResourcesFromOwner(request.inputs, this.address)
); // @audit-issue here we do not exclude ids we already got and used for another transaction in the current block
request.addResources(resources);
// [...]
}
// [...]
return request;
}
Impact Details
This issue will lead to unexpected SDK behaviour. Looking at the scenario in Brief/Intro, it could have the following impacts for users:
- A transaction does not get included in the
txpool/ in a block - A previous transaction silently gets removed from the
txpooland replaced with a new one
Proof of Concept
The following PoC transfers 100 coins from wallet2 to wallet after which wallet2 has two UTXOs one with value 100 and one with a very high value (this is printed to the console). Afterwards, wallet will attempt transfering 80 coins back to wallet2 twice in one block, each in a separate transaction. This should work perfectly fine as wallet has two UTXOs where each can cover the cost of each respective transaction. Now when running this one of the following will happen:
- both transfers from
wallettowallet2get a differentUTXO. This is the case if execution is successful andwallet2has80coins more thanwalletin the end. - both transfers get the same
UTXO. In this case the script will fail and throw an error as then both transactions will have the same hash
In order to execute this PoC, please deploy a local node with a blocktime of 5secs as I wrote my PoC for that blocktime. Note that with a small change it will also work with other blocktimes. Then add the PoC to a file poc_resources.ts and compile it with tsc poc_resources.ts. Finally execute it with node poc_resources.js.
Since the choice which UTXO is taken as input is random, it might take a few tries to trigger the bug!
import { JsonAbi, Script, Provider, WalletUnlocked, Account, Predicate, Wallet, CoinQuantityLike, coinQuantityfy, EstimatedTxParams, BN, Coin, AbstractAddress, Address, Contract, ScriptTransactionRequest } from 'fuels';
const abi: JsonAbi = {
'encoding': '1',
'types': [
{
'typeId': 0,
'type': '()',
'components': [],
'typeParameters': null
}
],
'functions': [
{
'inputs': [],
'name': 'main',
'output': {
'name': '',
'type': 0,
'typeArguments': null
},
'attributes': null
}
],
'loggedTypes': [],
'messagesTypes': [],
'configurables': []
};
const FUEL_NETWORK_URL = 'http://127.0.0.1:4000/v1/graphql';
async function executeTransaction() {
const provider = await Provider.create(FUEL_NETWORK_URL);
const wallet: WalletUnlocked = Wallet.fromPrivateKey('0x37fa81c84ccd547c30c176b118d5cb892bdb113e8e80141f266519422ef9eefd', provider);
const wallet2: WalletUnlocked = Wallet.fromPrivateKey('0xde97d8624a438121b86a1956544bd72ed68cd69f2c99555b08b1e8c51ffd511c', provider);
const sleep = (ms: number) => new Promise((resolve) => setTimeout(resolve, ms));
console.log("Balance wallet before: ", await wallet.getBalance());
console.log("Balance wallet2 before: ", await wallet2.getBalance());
wallet2.transfer(wallet.address, 100);
await sleep(5500);
await wallet.transfer(wallet2.address, 80);
console.log('wallet -> wallet2');
await wallet.transfer(wallet2.address, 80);
console.log('wallet -> wallet2');
console.log("Balance wallet after: ", await wallet.getBalance());
console.log("Balance wallet2 after: ", await wallet2.getBalance());
};
executeTransaction().catch(console.error);
Impact
The application does not adequately validate input before processing it, allowing unexpected values to reach sensitive code paths. Typical impact: varies by context: data corruption, logic bypass, or denial of service.
CVE-2024-41945 has a CVSS score of 3.1 (Low). The vector is network-reachable, low privileges required, and no user interaction. A CVSS score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether this affects your application depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable in your environment. A fixed version is available (0.93.0); upgrading removes the vulnerable code path.
Affected versions
Security releases
Kodem intelligence
Severity tells you how bad this could be in the worst case. It does not tell you whether you are exposed. Exploitability and impact are functions of runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A vulnerable package can sit in your dependency tree and never run.
Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter. Kodem's runtime-powered SCA identifies whether this CVE is reachable in your applications.
Already deployed Kodem?
See it in your environmentNew to Kodem? Get a demo →Remediation advice
I would recommend adding a buffer to the Account class, in which retrieved resources are saved. These can then be provided to getResourcesToSpend to be excluded from future queries but need to be removed from the buffer if their respective transaction fails to be included, in order to be able to use those resources again in such cases.
Frequently Asked Questions
- What is CVE-2024-41945? CVE-2024-41945 is a low-severity improper input validation vulnerability in @fuel-ts/account (npm), affecting versions < 0.93.0. It is fixed in 0.93.0. The application does not adequately validate input before processing it, allowing unexpected values to reach sensitive code paths.
- How severe is CVE-2024-41945? CVE-2024-41945 has a CVSS score of 3.1 (Low). This score reflects the worst-case severity of the vulnerability, not your specific exposure. Whether it represents real risk in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable.
- Which versions of @fuel-ts/account are affected by CVE-2024-41945? @fuel-ts/account (npm) versions < 0.93.0 is affected.
- Is there a fix for CVE-2024-41945? Yes. CVE-2024-41945 is fixed in 0.93.0. Upgrade to this version or later.
- Is CVE-2024-41945 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether CVE-2024-41945 is exploitable in your environment depends on whether the vulnerable code is present and reachable. A CVSS score is a worst-case rating; it does not account for your specific deployment, configuration, or usage patterns. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to show which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so you can focus on the ones that represent real risk. Get a demo
- What actually determines whether CVE-2024-41945 is exploitable, and how bad it is? Exploitability and impact are not fixed properties of a CVE. They depend on runtime truth: whether the vulnerable code is present, reachable, and actually executes in your application. A high CVSS score on a dependency that never runs is not the same as real risk. Kodem, an Intelligent Application Security platform, uses runtime intelligence to reveal which vulnerabilities actually execute in production, so teams prioritize the ones that genuinely matter.
- How do I fix CVE-2024-41945? Upgrade
@fuel-ts/accountto 0.93.0 or later.