wasmtime is a fast and secure runtime for WebAssembly. In affected versions wasmtime's code generator, Cranelift, has a bug on x86_64 targets where address-mode computation mistakenly would calculate a 35-bit effective address instead of WebAssembly's defined 33-bit effective address. This bug means that, with default codegen settings, a wasm-controlled load/store operation could read/write addresses up to 35 bits away from the base of linear memory. Due to this bug, however, addresses up to 0xffffffff * 8 + 0x7ffffffc = 36507222004 = ~34G bytes away from the base of linear memory are possible from guest code. This means that the virtual memory 6G away from the base of linear memory up to ~34G away can be read/written by a malicious module. A guest module can, without the knowledge of the embedder, read/write memory in this region. The memory may belong to other WebAssembly instances when using the pooling allocator, for example. Affected embedders are recommended to analyze preexisting wasm modules to see if they're affected by the incorrect codegen rules and possibly correlate that with an anomalous number of traps during historical execution to locate possibly suspicious modules. The specific bug in Cranelift's x86_64 backend is that a WebAssembly address which is left-shifted by a constant amount from 1 to 3 will get folded into x86_64's addressing modes which perform shifts. For example (i32.load (i32.shl (local.get 0) (i32.const 3))) loads from the WebAssembly address $local0 << 3. When translated to Cranelift the $local0 << 3 computation, a 32-bit value, is zero-extended to a 64-bit value and then added to the base address of linear memory. Cranelift would generate an instruction of the form movl (%base, %local0, 8), %dst which calculates %base + %local0 << 3. The bug here, however, is that the address computation happens with 64-bit values, where the $local0 << 3 computation was supposed to be truncated to a a 32-bit value. This means that %local0, which can use up to 32-bits for an address, gets 3 extra bits of address space to be accessible via this movl instruction. The fix in Cranelift is to remove the erroneous lowering rules in the backend which handle these zero-extended expression. The above example is then translated to movl %local0, %temp; shl $3, %temp; movl (%base, %temp), %dst which correctly truncates the intermediate computation of %local0 << 3 to 32-bits inside the %temp register which is then added to the %base value. Wasmtime version 4.0.1, 5.0.1, and 6.0.1 have been released and have all been patched to no longer contain the erroneous lowering rules. While updating Wasmtime is recommended, there are a number of possible workarounds that embedders can employ to mitigate this issue if updating is not possible. Note that none of these workarounds are on-by-default and require explicit configuration: 1. The Config::static_memory_maximum_size(0) option can be used to force all accesses to linear memory to be explicitly bounds-checked. This will perform a bounds check separately from the address-mode computation which correctly calculates the effective address of a load/store. Note that this can have a large impact on the execution performance of WebAssembly modules. 2. The Config::static_memory_guard_size(1 << 36) option can be used to greatly increase the guard pages placed after linear memory. This will guarantee that memory accesses up-to-34G away are guaranteed to be semantically correct by reserving unmapped memory for the instance. Note that this reserves a very large amount of virtual memory per-instances and can greatly reduce the maximum number of concurrent instances being run. 3. If using a non-x86_64 host is possible, then that will also work around this bug. This bug does not affect Wasmtime's or Cranelift's AArch64 backend, for example.
| Software | From | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|
| bytecodealliance / wasmtime | 6.0.0 | 6.0.0.x |
| bytecodealliance / wasmtime | 5.0.0 | 5.0.0.x |
| bytecodealliance / wasmtime | 0.37.0 | 4.0.1 |
| bytecodealliance / cranelift-codegen | 0.93.0 | 0.93.0.x |
| bytecodealliance / cranelift-codegen | 0.92.0 | 0.92.0.x |
| bytecodealliance / cranelift-codegen | 0.84.0 | 0.91.1 |
wasmtime
|
0.37.0 | 4.0.1 |
wasmtime
|
5.0.0 | 5.0.1 |
wasmtime
|
6.0.0 | 6.0.1 |
cranelift-codegen
|
0.84.0 | 0.91.1 |
cranelift-codegen
|
0.92.0 | 0.92.1 |
cranelift-codegen
|
0.93.0 | 0.93.1 |
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.