cargo package report

Is bun_collections safe?

1 known vulnerability.

// reach

0 direct dependencies

none carry a known advisory

    0 packages depend on it

    an advisory here reaches each of them

      Create a free accountfor every dependency path, dependent and what to upgrade
      // ai model usage

      Tracked for PyPI packages. HuggingFace models declare Python dependencies, so cargo packages are not covered.


      cvss
      not scored

      severity out of 10

      epss
      not scored

      chance of exploitation in 30 days

      xyz score
      not scored

      CyberXYZ composite out of 10

      fig. 01 — RUSTSEC-2026-0309, the advisory selected below

      // 1 advisories

      RUSTSEC-2026-0309

      UNKNOWN

      In versions before 0.2.1, SinglyLinkedList::remove is safe and walks the intrusive list with an unchecked dereference. On an empty list, or when node is not in the list, (currentelm).next reads a null pointer. That is undefined behavior. The list head is a raw mut Node, and safe code can construct the empty list.

      The maintainer fixed this in 0.2.1 by rejecting those two cases with an unconditional assert! before the pointer is followed, matching the upstream Zig unwrap on the same paths. 0.2.0 was yanked. Versions 0.1.0 through 0.1.13 are still published and still contain the unchecked walk.


      Checked 2026-09-26 at 20:44 UTC. The most recent advisory here was published 2026-09-20. Updated continuously from NVD, GHSA, OSV and CNA feeds.

      Think a verdict here is wrong? Tell us — we respond within 2 business days.