CVE-2026-52735

Am I affected

You are affected if:

1. You run any version of zebrad up to and including v4.4.1.
2. Your node validates blocks on mainnet, testnet, or any network where both Zebra and zcashd nodes participate.

All default configurations are affected. No feature flags, non-default settings, or special build options are required.

Zebra's P2SH sigop counter uses a pure-Rust code path that short-circuits on disabled opcodes (such as OP_CODESEPARATOR), returning a partial count of zero for any sigops following the disabled opcode. The reference implementation (zcashd) correctly counts through disabled opcodes in its static sigop analysis. This produces a consensus divergence: Zebra accepts blocks that zcashd rejects when the block-wide MAX_BLOCK_SIGOPS = 20,000 threshold is crossed on one side but not the other.

An attacker can exploit this without mining capability. Broadcasting transactions that spend P2SH outputs with malicious redeem scripts is sufficient; any Zebra miner who includes those transactions in a block triggers a chain split between Zebra and zcashd validators.

Details

The P2SH sigop counter at zebra-script/src/lib.rs:399 calls script::Code(redeemed_bytes).sig_op_count(true), which is a pure-Rust path through zcash_script-0.4.4. The legacy (non-P2SH) sigop counter at lib.rs:282-289 correctly uses the C++ FFI via interpreter.legacy_sigop_count_script(). Only the P2SH path bypasses the FFI.

The Rust parser in zcash_script-0.4.4/src/opcode/mod.rs:1247-1260 treats 16 disabled opcodes (0x7e through 0xab, including OP_CAT, OP_SUBSTR, OP_AND, OP_OR, OP_XOR, OP_2MUL, OP_2DIV, OP_MUL, OP_DIV, OP_MOD, OP_LSHIFT, OP_RSHIFT, and OP_CODESEPARATOR) as Err(Error::Disabled(...)). The sig_op_count function at iter.rs:104-115 uses try_fold, which terminates on the first Err and returns the partial sum accumulated so far.

zcashd's GetOp2 (script.h:514-562) returns true for all non-push opcodes including the disabled range. Its GetSigOpCount(true) (script.cpp:152-174) continues counting through disabled opcodes. zcashd rejects disabled opcodes at execution time in the interpreter, not during static sigop analysis.

A redeem script of [0xab, OP_CHECKMULTISIG x 50] produces: Zebra = 0 sigops, zcashd = 1,000 sigops. Across 21 inputs in a block, Zebra computes 0 while zcashd computes 21,000, crossing the MAX_BLOCK_SIGOPS = 20,000 threshold on one side only.

Workarounds

There is no configuration-level workaround. All Zebra nodes validating blocks on a network shared with zcashd are affected. Upgrade as soon as the patched version is available.

Credit

Reported by @samsulselfut via a private GitHub Security Advisory submission.

A chain split between Zebra and zcashd validators. The attacker broadcasts spending transactions referencing P2SH outputs whose redeem scripts contain a disabled opcode followed by OP_CHECKSIG or OP_CHECKMULTISIG opcodes. When a Zebra miner (estimated ~30% of current network hashrate) includes these transactions in a block, Zebra validators accept the block while zcashd validators reject it with bad-blk-sigops. The two halves of the network diverge and every subsequent block extending the Zebra-side tip inherits the divergence.

The attacker does not need mining capability, RPC access, or any special privileges. The cost is the transaction fees for the funding and spending transactions.

Kodem intelligence

Patched in Zebra 4.4.2. The fix routes the P2SH sigop counter through the same C++ FFI already used by the legacy sigop counter.

1. What is CVE-2026-52735? CVE-2026-52735 is a critical-severity security vulnerability in zebra-script (rust), affecting versions <= 6.0.1. It is fixed in 7.0.0, 4.5.0.
2. Which packages are affected by CVE-2026-52735?
   • zebra-script (rust) (versions <= 6.0.1)
   • zebrad (rust) (versions <= 4.4.1)
3. Is there a fix for CVE-2026-52735? Yes. CVE-2026-52735 is fixed in 7.0.0, 4.5.0. Upgrade to this version or later.
4. Is CVE-2026-52735 exploitable, and should I be worried? Whether CVE-2026-52735 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
5. What actually determines whether CVE-2026-52735 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.
6. How do I fix CVE-2026-52735?
   • Upgrade zebra-script to 7.0.0 or later
   • Upgrade zebrad to 4.5.0 or later