AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Moderate 63 Bitcoin

fix(core): use verifiers for translations syscalls

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by tychovrahe

62/100 · Adequate
fix(core): use verifiers for translations syscalls

[no changelog]
✓ Specific, descriptive subject✓ Names a concrete action or component✓ Uses a recognizable type or scope! No meaningful explanatory body
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This commit changes two system call handlers in Trezor's firmware so that translation-related read/write operations go through 'verified' versions of functions. The change suggests the previous unverified versions may have allowed untrusted code (apps running on the device) to access or modify translation data in unsafe ways, such as passing bad memory pointers or lengths. Without the verified wrapper, a malicious or buggy app could potentially corrupt memory or read/write data it should not. The patch is very small and does not show the verifier code itself, so we cannot confirm the exact bug or exploit path.

Recommended action

Review the implementations of translations_write__verified and translations_read__verified to confirm they validate data, offset, len, and the len output pointer against caller-accessible memory. Audit other syscalls in the same dispatch table for similar missing verification wrappers. Consider whether this change warrants a security advisory or CVE if unprivileged code could exploit the prior unverified path.

Security signals we found

01

Syscall dispatch now routes through __verified variants

02

Change limited to translation read/write syscalls; erase syscall already used verified form or was not changed

03

Implies missing input validation on pointer and length arguments

04

Potential memory safety / privilege boundary issue between kernel and app/runtime

05

No changelog entry and no explicit security disclosure in commit metadata

Risk score

Why this scored 63/100

Our methodology →
Potential impact 18/30
Exploitability 14/25
Stealth signal 10/15
Affected reach 12/15
Confidence 6/10
Evidence quality 3/5
Human-validated context

Community notes

Notes can correct, qualify, or add evidence to the AI analysis. Every note shown here has been validated by a human moderator.

No validated notes yet.

The AI analysis stands alone for now. Submit a note if you can add evidence or important context.