Skip to content

soroban-fixed-point-math has Incorrect Rounding and Overflow Handling in Signed Fixed-Point Math with Negatives

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published Jan 27, 2026 in script3/soroban-fixed-point-math • Updated Jan 28, 2026

Package

cargo soroban-fixed-point-math (Rust)

Affected versions

= 1.4.0
= 1.3.0

Patched versions

1.4.1
1.3.1

Description

Impact

Incorrect rounding direction for signed mul and div operations

The mulDiv(x, y, z) function incorrectly handled cases where both the intermediate product $x * y$ and the divisor $z$ were negative. The logic assumed that if the intermediate product was negative, the final result must also be negative, neglecting the sign of $z$.

This resulted in rounding being applied in the wrong direction for cases where both $x * y$ and $z$ were negative. The functions most at risk are fixed_div_floor and fixed_div_ceil, as they often use non-constant numbers as the divisor $z$ in mulDiv.

This error is present in all signed FixedPoint and SorobanFixedPoint implementations, including i64, i128, and I256.

Negative Overflow in i64

The mulDiv(x, y, z) function for i64 used the i128 type to handle "phantom overflows". These are overflows that occur intermediately during a calculation, like when computing the intermediate product $x * y$. When the final result of mulDiv was computed in i128, it was scaled back down to i64 before returning. While the code verified that the result did not exceed i64::MAX, it did not check against i64::MIN.

This caused negative results smaller than i64:MIN to wrap around to a large positive number instead of being caught as an overflow.

This error only exists for the FixedPoint implementation of i64.

Patches

  • v1.3.0 users should upgrade to patch v1.3.1
  • v1.4.0 users should upgrade to patch v1.4.1

All versions >=v1.4.1 contain the patch.

Workarounds

There are no known workarounds. Upgrade to the patched version.

Credits

soroban-fixed-point-math would like to thank the team at Certora for discovering and reporting the issue.

References

Published by the National Vulnerability Database Jan 27, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Jan 28, 2026
Reviewed Jan 28, 2026
Last updated Jan 28, 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 v3 base metrics

Attack vector
Network
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
High
Availability
None

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A: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.
(1st percentile)

Weaknesses

Incorrect Calculation

The product performs a calculation that generates incorrect or unintended results that are later used in security-critical decisions or resource management. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-24783

GHSA ID

GHSA-x5m4-43jf-hh65
Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.