Unfortunately a CVE from a decade ago and the 2.x lineage are both
sufficiently ancient history that we realistically don't have a lot of
information on hand for this topic.

Just from the linked github advisory page, it does appear to me that what
happened is that this was a C++Proto issue and likely the only patches were
in C++, but all languages including Java and Go are listed on that CVE.

There's two possible reasons that I can imagine that having happened:

- Protobuf only had one unified numbering scheme (3.4.0 for all languages,
unlike today where the numbering scheme is that each language is released
as X.4.0 where X is a separate choice for each language and the 4.0 portion
is the cross-version numbering). The CVE was simply declared on all
"protobuf 3.4.0" and that was backed out to include things that it really
didn't apply to, including Java and Go.

- It may also have deliberately happened due to Protoc itself is
implemented using C++Proto, which means ~all things using protoc
technically do contain the vulnerable C++Proto code. However, supply chain
attacks on protoc are not considered to be part of our threat model these
days, so if we declared a CVE on C++Proto today we would not consider that
to be a topic for JavaProto, though I'm unsure if that was the case a
decade ago or not.

On Thu, Jul 3, 2025 at 4:21 AM 'Somak Dutta' via Protocol Buffers <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I am writing to ask about vulnerability reported GHSA-jwvw-v7c5-m82h
> <https://github.com/advisories/GHSA-jwvw-v7c5-m82h> for protobuf-java
> <https://mvnrepository.com/artifact/com.google.protobuf/protobuf-java> which
> specifically talks about "*protobuf allows remote authenticated attackers
> to cause a heap-based buffer overflow.*"
>
> Specifically to ask about earlier versions < 3.4.0.
> Take for example a version 2.5.0, based on all the code i see for
> CodedInputStream
> <https://github.com/protocolbuffers/protobuf/blob/v2.5.0/java/src/main/java/com/google/protobuf/CodedInputStream.java>
> - methods such as readRawBytes/refillBuffer, which are performing either
> copy to/from or resizing , are all pretty safe from integer overflows.
> - there is also present a slow path, where we read buffer in chunks to
> potentially prevent out of memory issues.
>
> First Question:
> However i am not seeing any evidence where the package can be vulnerable
> to a buffer overflows issues
> Additionally given java is memory safe language i am failing to see how
> java ecosystem is susceptible to the afore mentioned vulnerability.
>
> Second Question:
> There is a question related / or along the same veins here
> https://github.com/protocolbuffers/protobuf/issues/760?reload=1#issuecomment-847162817
> . The potential fix also suggests issue might be present only in c/c++
> ecosystems.
>
>
> Any clarifications from the community would be appreciated.
> Thank you
>
>
>
>
> *Confidentiality Notice: This email and any attachments are confidential
> and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
> are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify the
> sender immediately and delete it from your system. Unauthorized use,
> disclosure, or copying of this email or its contents is strictly
> prohibited.*
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Protocol Buffers" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> To view this discussion visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/protobuf/b1dd5d8b-f50e-4545-b5d5-98920fc9bea2n%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/protobuf/b1dd5d8b-f50e-4545-b5d5-98920fc9bea2n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Protocol Buffers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/protobuf/CAKRmVH-pA8oxvux%3DSF2i1%2BGdtRFF6SpaRAyFyUqrYJ%2Bya3-RqA%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to