`CHECK` failure in depthwise ops via overflows
Impact
The implementation of depthwise ops in TensorFlow is vulnerable to a denial of service via CHECK-failure (assertion failure) caused by overflowing the number of elements in a tensor:
import tensorflow as tf
input = tf.constant(1, shape=[1, 4, 4, 3], dtype=tf.float32)
filter_sizes = tf.constant(1879048192, shape=[13], dtype=tf.int32)
out_backprop = tf.constant(1, shape=[1, 4, 4, 3], dtype=tf.float32)
tf.raw_ops.DepthwiseConv2dNativeBackpropFilter(
input=input, filter_sizes=filter_sizes, out_backprop=out_backprop, strides=[1, 1, 1, 1], padding="SAME")
This is another instance of TFSA-2021-198 (CVE-2021-41197).
Patches
We have patched the issue in GitHub commit 3796cc4fcd93ae55812a457abc96dcd55fbb854b.
The fix will be included in TensorFlow 2.9.0. We will also cherrypick this commit on TensorFlow 2.8.1, TensorFlow 2.7.2, and TensorFlow 2.6.4, as these are also affected and still in supported range.
For more information
Please consult our security guide for more information regarding the security model and how to contact us with issues and questions.
Attribution
This vulnerability has been reported by Neophytos Christou from Secure Systems Lab at Brown University.
| Software | From | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
tensorflow
|
- | 2.6.4 |
|
tensorflow
|
2.7.0 | 2.7.2 |
|
tensorflow
|
2.8.0 | 2.8.1 |
|
tensorflow-cpu
|
- | 2.6.4 |
|
tensorflow-cpu
|
2.7.0 | 2.7.2 |
|
tensorflow-cpu
|
2.8.0 | 2.8.1 |
|
tensorflow-gpu
|
- | 2.6.4 |
|
tensorflow-gpu
|
2.7.0 | 2.7.2 |
|
tensorflow-gpu
|
2.8.0 | 2.8.1 |
Deep Security Visibility Without the Complexity
SynScan provides clear, real-time security insights so you can monitor your attack surface, spot risks early, and act fast—without extra complexity.
- No setup fees
- 5-min deployment
- Cancel anytime
Frequently Asked Questions
A security vulnerability is a weakness in software, hardware, or configuration that can be exploited to compromise confidentiality, integrity, or availability. Many vulnerabilities are tracked as CVEs (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures), which provide a standardized identifier so teams can coordinate patching, mitigation, and risk assessment across tools and vendors.
CVSS (Common Vulnerability Scoring System) estimates technical severity, but it doesn't automatically equal business risk. Prioritize using context like internet exposure, affected asset criticality, known exploitation (proof-of-concept or in-the-wild), and whether compensating controls exist. A "Medium" CVSS on an exposed, production system can be more urgent than a "Critical" on an isolated, non-production host.
A vulnerability is the underlying weakness. An exploit is the method or code used to take advantage of it. A zero-day is a vulnerability that is unknown to the vendor or has no publicly available fix when attackers begin using it. In practice, risk increases sharply when exploitation becomes reliable or widespread.
Recurring findings usually come from incomplete Asset Discovery, inconsistent patch management, inherited images, and configuration drift. In modern environments, you also need to watch the software supply chain: dependencies, containers, build pipelines, and third-party services can reintroduce the same weakness even after you patch a single host. Unknown or unmanaged assets (often called Shadow IT) are a common reason the same issues resurface.
Use a simple, repeatable triage model: focus first on externally exposed assets, high-value systems (identity, VPN, email, production), vulnerabilities with known exploits, and issues that enable remote code execution or privilege escalation. Then enforce patch SLAs and track progress using consistent metrics so remediation is steady, not reactive.
SynScan combines attack surface monitoring and continuous security auditing to keep your inventory current, flag high-impact vulnerabilities early, and help you turn raw findings into a practical remediation plan.