Possible endless data attack from attacker-controlled registry in cosign
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 21/100)
- The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 0.64% (FIRST EPSS).
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it. No account or password is required. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- Fixed version: sigstore cosign 2.2.1.
- Severity is disputed: the assigning authority (CNA) scores it 3.1, NVD 5.3.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to sigstore cosign 2.2.1 or later.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS
Cosign is a sigstore signing tool for OCI containers. Cosign is susceptible to a denial of service by an attacker controlled registry. An attacker who controls a remote registry can return a high number of attestations and/or signatures to Cosign and cause Cosign to enter a long loop resulting in an endless data attack. The root cause is that Cosign loops through all attestations fetched from the remote registry in pkg/cosign.FetchAttestations. The attacker needs to compromise the registry or make a request to a registry they control. When doing so, the attacker must return a high number of attestations in the response to Cosign. The result will be that the attacker can cause Cosign to go into a long or infinite loop that will prevent other users from verifying their data. In Kyvernos case, an attacker whose privileges are limited to making requests to the cluster can make a request with an image reference to their own registry, trigger the infinite loop and deny other users from completing their admission requests. Alternatively, the attacker can obtain control of the registry used by an organization and return a high number of attestations instead the expected number of attestations. The issue can be mitigated rather simply by setting a limit to the limit of attestations that Cosign will loop through. The limit does not need to be high to be within the vast majority of use cases and still prevent the endless data attack. This issue has been patched in version 2.2.1 and users are advised to upgrade.
- Published
- Nov 7, 2023
- Updated
- Jun 17, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.6% · 49th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-400
Report tools
Action score
21
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 21 / 40 · 5.3 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.6%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- none
- Automatable
- no
- Technical impact
- partial
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
CNA vs NVD score
- NVD
- 5.3
- CNA · GitHub_M
- 3.1
- 2.2 point gap
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
The score given by the assigning authority versus NVD’s independent score. A gap means the severity is contested.
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- No public exploit code on record
- A fix has been released
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| sigstore | cosign | cpe:2.3:a:sigstore:cosign |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- sigstore cosignbefore 2.2.1
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (GitHub_M). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
sigstore cosign
- < 2.2.1affected
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| Go | github.com/sigstore/cosign | from 0 | — |
| Go | github.com/sigstore/cosign | before 1.13.2 | 1.13.2 |
| Go | github.com/sigstore/cosign/v2 | before 2.2.1 | 2.2.1 |
| openSUSE:Tumbleweed | cosign | before 2.2.1-1.1 | 2.2.1-1.1 |
| SUSE:Linux Enterprise Module for Basesystem 15 SP4 | cosign | before 2.2.1-150400.3.14.1 | 2.2.1-150400.3.14.1 |
| SUSE:Linux Enterprise Module for Basesystem 15 SP4 | cosign | before 2.2.1-150400.3.14.1 | 2.2.1-150400.3.14.1 |
Same product
sigstore: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2022-35929False positive signature verification in cosign39Monitor
- CVE-2024-29903Cosign vulnerable to machine-wide denial of service via malicious artifacts30Monitor
- CVE-2024-29902Cosign vulnerable to system-wide denial of service via malicious attachments23Monitor
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2022-23649Feb 18, 2022 · Improper Certificate Validation in Cosign13Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2022-36056Sep 14, 2022 · Vulnerabilities with blob verification in sigstore cosign22Monitor
- Later →CVE-2026-22703Jan 10, 2026 · Cosign verification accepts any valid Rekor entry under certain conditions22Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
| Product / package | Fixed version | Source |
|---|---|---|
| sigstore cosign | 2.2.1 · description | Vendor (CNA) |
| Go:github.com/sigstore/cosign | 1.13.2 | Package registry (OSV) |
| Go:github.com/sigstore/cosign/v2 | 2.2.1 | Package registry (OSV) |
| opensuse:cosign | 2.2.1-150400.3.14.1 · openSUSE:Leap 15.4 | Package registry (OSV) |
| suse:cosign | 2.2.1-150400.3.14.1 · SUSE:Linux Enterprise Module for Basesystem 15 SP4 | Package registry (OSV) |
Exploit status
No known public exploit
No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
No dated events beyond publication.
FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
No credits in the CNA record.
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
No nightly-computed relations.
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Anyone who can reach it over the internet can trigger it.
- No account or password is required.
- No user action is required.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- none
- Integrity
- none
- Availability
- low · the service can be disrupted
- Attack vector
- Network
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- None
- Integrity impact
- None
- Availability impact
- Low
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-400 · Uncontrolled Resource ConsumptionCVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
nvd-primary
Root cause
Code that parses nested structures sets no depth or size limit. A small input can turn into a disproportionate processing load.
The bug in code
The whole CWE-400 classA representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.
Vulnerable
function expand(node) { return node.children.map(expand);}Fixed
const MAX_DEPTH = 32;function expand(node, depth = 0) { if (depth > MAX_DEPTH) throw new Error("too deep"); return node.children.map((c) => expand(c, depth + 1));}Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Change log
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.