Versions of the package fastecdsa before 2.3.2 are vulnerable to Use of Uninitialized Variable on the stack, via the curvemath_mul function in src/curveMath.c, due to being used and interpreted as user-defined type. Depending on the variable's actual value it could be arbitrary free(), arbitrary realloc(), null pointer dereference and other. Since the stack can be controlled by the attacker, the vulnerability could be used to corrupt allocator structure, leading to possible heap exploitation. The attacker could cause denial of service by exploiting this vulnerability.

The `ecdsa` PyPI package is a pure Python implementation of ECC (Elliptic Curve Cryptography) with support for ECDSA (Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm), EdDSA (Edwards-curve Digital Signature Algorithm) and ECDH (Elliptic Curve Diffie-Hellman). Versions 0.18.0 and prior are vulnerable to the Minerva attack. As of time of publication, no known patched version exists.

ecdsautils is a tiny collection of programs used for ECDSA (keygen, sign, verify). `ecdsa_verify_[prepare_]legacy()` does not check whether the signature values `r` and `s` are non-zero. A signature consisting only of zeroes is always considered valid, making it trivial to forge signatures. Requiring multiple signatures from different public keys does not mitigate the issue: `ecdsa_verify_list_legacy()` will accept an arbitrary number of such forged signatures. Both the `ecdsautil verify` CLI command and the libecdsautil library are affected. The issue has been fixed in ecdsautils 0.4.1. All older versions of ecdsautils (including versions before the split into a library and a CLI utility) are vulnerable.

The verify function in the Stark Bank Python ECDSA library (aka starkbank-escada or ecdsa-python) before 2.0.1 fails to check that the signature is non-zero, which allows attackers to forge signatures on arbitrary messages.

The verify function in the Stark Bank Java ECDSA library (ecdsa-java) 1.0.0 fails to check that the signature is non-zero, which allows attackers to forge signatures on arbitrary messages.

The verify function in the Stark Bank Node.js ECDSA library (ecdsa-node) 1.1.2 fails to check that the signature is non-zero, which allows attackers to forge signatures on arbitrary messages.

The verify function in the Stark Bank .NET ECDSA library (ecdsa-dotnet) 1.3.1 fails to check that the signature is non-zero, which allows attackers to forge signatures on arbitrary messages.

The verify function in the Stark Bank Elixir ECDSA library (ecdsa-elixir) 1.0.0 fails to check that the signature is non-zero, which allows attackers to forge signatures on arbitrary messages.

An issue was discovered in fastecdsa before 2.1.2. When using the NIST P-256 curve in the ECDSA implementation, the point at infinity is mishandled. This means that for an extreme value in k and s^-1, the signature verification fails even if the signature is correct. This behavior is not solely a usability problem. There are some threat models where an attacker can benefit by successfully guessing users for whom signature verification will fail.

A flaw was found in all python-ecdsa versions before 0.13.3, where it did not correctly verify whether signatures used DER encoding. Without this verification, a malformed signature could be accepted, making the signature malleable. Without proper verification, an attacker could use a malleable signature to create false transactions.