cargo package report

Is ic-stable-structures safe?

1 known vulnerability, worst severity MEDIUM.

cvss

5.9

how bad it is if exploited, out of 10

epss

0.50%

chance of exploitation in the next 30 days

xyz score

not scored

CyberXYZ composite, out of 10

fig. 01 — GHSA-3rcq-39xp-7xjp, the advisory selected below

// advisories

GHSA-3rcq-39xp-7xjp

MEDIUMCVE-2024-4435

When storing unbounded types in a BTreeMap, a node is represented as a linked list of "memory chunks". In some cases, when we deallocate a node only the first memory chunk is deallocated, and the rest of the memory chunks remain (incorrectly) allocated, causing a memory leak.

Affected: >=0.6.0, <0.6.4
Fixed in: 0.6.4
Weakness: CWE-401
Published: 2024-05-21
Source: github

GHSA NVD MITRE

// dependencies

0 direct

// ai model usage

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

Checked 2026-09-22 at 03:30 UTC. The most recent advisory here was published 2024-05-21. Updated continuously from NVD, GHSA, OSV and CNA feeds.

Is ic-stable-structures safe? cargo package security report | CyberXYZ