cargo package report

Is nano_arena safe?

1 known vulnerability, worst severity CRITICAL.

cvss
9.0

how bad it is if exploited, out of 10

epss
1.4%

chance of exploitation in the next 30 days

xyz score
4.0

CyberXYZ composite, out of 10

fig. 01 — GHSA-wp34-mqw5-jj85, the advisory selected below

// advisories

GHSA-wp34-mqw5-jj85

CRITICALCVE-2021-28032

Affected versions of this crate assumed that Borrow<Idx> was guaranteed to return the same value on .borrow(). The borrowed index value was used to retrieve a mutable reference to a value.

Affected
< 0.5.2
Fixed in
0.5.2
Weakness
CWE-416
Published
2021-08-25
Source
github

GHSANVDMITREreferencereferencereference


// ai model usage

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


Checked 2026-09-22 at 01:48 UTC. The most recent advisory here was published 2021-08-25. Updated continuously from NVD, GHSA, OSV and CNA feeds.

Think a verdict here is wrong? Tell us — we respond within 2 business days.
Is nano_arena safe? cargo package security report | CyberXYZ