CVE-2021-41272
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedBesu is an Ethereum client written in Java. Starting in version 21.10.0, changes in the implementation of the SHL, SHR, and SAR operations resulted in the introduction of a signed type coercion error in values that represent negative values for 32 bit signed integers. Smart contracts that ask for shifts between approximately 2 billion and 4 billion bits (nonsensical but valid values for the operation) will fail to execute and hence fail to validate. In networks where vulnerable versions are mining with other clients or non-vulnerable versions this will result in a fork and the relevant transactions will not be included in the fork. In networks where vulnerable versions are not mining (such as Rinkeby) no fork will result and the validator nodes will stop accepting blocks. In networks where only vulnerable versions are mining the relevant transaction will not be included in any blocks. When the network adds a non-vulnerable version the network will act as in the first case. Besu 21.10.2 contains a patch for this issue. Besu 21.7.4 is not vulnerable and clients can roll back to that version. There is a workaround available: Once a transaction with the relevant shift operations is included in the canonical chain, the only remediation is to make sure all nodes are on non-vulnerable versions.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysisA detailed technical summary for this CVE is being prepared.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data= 21.10.0= 21.10.1CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scopedBesu 21.10.2
- Identify all Besu nodes running versions 21.10.0 or 21.10.1
- Stop the Besu service on all affected nodes
- Upgrade Besu to version 21.10.2 (which contains the patch for this vulnerability)
- Alternatively, if 21.10.2 is not feasible, downgrade to version 21.7.4 (which is confirmed not vulnerable)
- Restart the Besu service after upgrading or downgrading
- Verify all nodes are running the fixed version and are accepting blocks properly
- If a problematic transaction is already in the canonical chain and the network has forked, ensure all nodes are on non-vulnerable versions to resolve the fork
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2021-41272 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2021-41272 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data