Total
50 CVE
| CVE | Vendors | Products | Updated | CVSS v2 | CVSS v3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CVE-2024-55563 | 1 Bitcoin | 1 Bitcoin Core | 2025-05-22 | N/A | N/A |
| Bitcoin Core through 27.2 allows transaction-relay jamming via an off-chain protocol attack, a related issue to CVE-2024-52913. For example, the outcome of an HTLC (Hashed Timelock Contract) can be changed because a flood of transaction traffic prevents propagation of certain Lightning channel transactions. | |||||
| CVE-2019-25220 | 1 Bitcoin | 1 Bitcoin Core | 2025-05-22 | N/A | N/A |
| Bitcoin Core before 24.0.1 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (daemon crash) via a flood of low-difficulty header chains (aka a "Chain Width Expansion" attack) because a node does not first verify that a presented chain has enough work before committing to store it. | |||||
| CVE-2024-35202 | 1 Bitcoin | 1 Bitcoin Core | 2025-05-22 | N/A | N/A |
| Bitcoin Core before 25.0 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (blocktxn message-handling assertion and node exit) by including transactions in a blocktxn message that are not committed to in a block's merkle root. FillBlock can be called twice for one PartiallyDownloadedBlock instance. | |||||
| CVE-2024-52922 | 1 Bitcoin | 1 Bitcoin Core | 2025-04-30 | N/A | N/A |
| In Bitcoin Core before 25.1, an attacker can cause a node to not download the latest block, because there can be minutes of delay when an announcing peer stalls instead of complying with the peer-to-peer protocol specification. | |||||
| CVE-2024-52920 | 1 Bitcoin | 1 Bitcoin Core | 2025-04-30 | N/A | N/A |
| Bitcoin Core before 0.20.0 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (infinite loop) via a malformed GETDATA message. | |||||
| CVE-2024-52919 | 1 Bitcoin | 1 Bitcoin Core | 2025-04-30 | N/A | N/A |
| Bitcoin Core before 22.0 has a CAddrMan nIdCount integer overflow and resultant assertion failure (and daemon exit) via a flood of addr messages. | |||||
| CVE-2024-52921 | 1 Bitcoin | 1 Bitcoin Core | 2025-04-30 | N/A | N/A |
| In Bitcoin Core before 25.0, a peer can affect the download state of other peers by sending a mutated block. | |||||
| CVE-2024-52917 | 1 Bitcoin | 1 Bitcoin Core | 2025-04-30 | N/A | N/A |
| Bitcoin Core before 22.0 has a miniupnp infinite loop in which it allocates memory on the basis of random data received over the network, e.g., large M-SEARCH replies from a fake UPnP device. | |||||
| CVE-2024-52915 | 1 Bitcoin | 1 Bitcoin Core | 2025-04-30 | N/A | N/A |
| Bitcoin Core before 0.20.0 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption) via a crafted INV message. | |||||
| CVE-2024-52916 | 1 Bitcoin | 1 Bitcoin Core | 2025-04-30 | N/A | N/A |
| Bitcoin Core before 0.15.0 allows a denial of service (OOM kill of a daemon process) via a flood of minimum difficulty headers. | |||||
| CVE-2024-52913 | 1 Bitcoin | 1 Bitcoin Core | 2025-04-30 | N/A | N/A |
| In Bitcoin Core before 0.21.0, an attacker could prevent a node from seeing a specific unconfirmed transaction, because transaction re-requests are mishandled. | |||||
| CVE-2024-52914 | 1 Bitcoin | 1 Bitcoin Core | 2025-04-30 | N/A | N/A |
| In Bitcoin Core before 0.18.0, a node could be stalled for hours when processing the orphans of a crafted unconfirmed transaction. | |||||
| CVE-2024-52912 | 1 Bitcoin | 1 Bitcoin Core | 2025-04-30 | N/A | N/A |
| Bitcoin Core before 0.21.0 allows a network split that is resultant from an integer overflow (calculating the time offset for newly connecting peers) and an abs64 logic bug. | |||||
| CVE-2023-33297 | 1 Bitcoin | 1 Bitcoin Core | 2025-01-28 | N/A | 7.5 HIGH |
| Bitcoin Core before 24.1, when debug mode is not used, allows attackers to cause a denial of service (e.g., CPU consumption) because draining the inventory-to-send queue is inefficient, as exploited in the wild in May 2023. | |||||
| CVE-2021-3195 | 1 Bitcoin | 1 Bitcoin Core | 2024-08-03 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| bitcoind in Bitcoin Core through 0.21.0 can create a new file in an arbitrary directory (e.g., outside the ~/.bitcoin directory) via a dumpwallet RPC call. NOTE: this reportedly does not violate the security model of Bitcoin Core, but can violate the security model of a fork that has implemented dumpwallet restrictions | |||||
| CVE-2023-50428 | 2 Bitcoin, Bitcoinknots | 2 Bitcoin Core, Bitcoin Knots | 2024-08-02 | N/A | 5.3 MEDIUM |
| In Bitcoin Core through 26.0 and Bitcoin Knots before 25.1.knots20231115, datacarrier size limits can be bypassed by obfuscating data as code (e.g., with OP_FALSE OP_IF), as exploited in the wild by Inscriptions in 2022 and 2023. NOTE: although this is a vulnerability from the perspective of the Bitcoin Knots project, some others consider it "not a bug." | |||||
| CVE-2018-17144 | 2 Bitcoin, Bitcoinknots | 2 Bitcoin Core, Bitcoin Knots | 2024-03-13 | 5.0 MEDIUM | 7.5 HIGH |
| Bitcoin Core 0.14.x before 0.14.3, 0.15.x before 0.15.2, and 0.16.x before 0.16.3 and Bitcoin Knots 0.14.x through 0.16.x before 0.16.3 allow a remote denial of service (application crash) exploitable by miners via duplicate input. An attacker can make bitcoind or Bitcoin-Qt crash. | |||||
| CVE-2018-20587 | 2 Bitcoin, Bitcoinknots | 2 Bitcoin Core, Bitcoin Knots | 2023-11-07 | 2.1 LOW | 5.5 MEDIUM |
| Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 through 0.17.1 and Bitcoin Knots 0.12.0 through 0.17.x before 0.17.1.knots20181229 have Incorrect Access Control. Local users can exploit this to steal currency by binding the RPC IPv4 localhost port, and forwarding requests to the IPv6 localhost port. | |||||
| CVE-2017-18350 | 1 Bitcoin | 1 Bitcoin Core | 2023-11-07 | 4.3 MEDIUM | 5.9 MEDIUM |
| bitcoind and Bitcoin-Qt prior to 0.15.1 have a stack-based buffer overflow if an attacker-controlled SOCKS proxy server is used. This results from an integer signedness error when the proxy server responds with an acknowledgement of an unexpected target domain name. | |||||
| CVE-2023-37192 | 1 Bitcoin | 1 Bitcoin Core | 2023-07-17 | N/A | 7.5 HIGH |
| Memory management and protection issues in Bitcoin Core v22 allows attackers to modify the stored sending address within the app's memory, potentially allowing them to redirect Bitcoin transactions to wallets of their own choosing. | |||||