Amulet Security Advisory for Cosmovisor: ASA-2023-001
Component: Cosmovisor Criticality : Medium Affected Versions : Cosmovisor < v1.0.0 (distributed with Cosmos-SDK < 0.46) Affected Users : Validator and Node operators utilizing unsupported versions of Cosmovisor Impact : DOS, potential RCE on node depending on configuration An issue has been identified on unsupported versions of Cosmovisor which may result in a Denial of Service or Remote Code Execution path depending on configuration for a node or validator using the vulnerable version to manage their node. If a validator is utilizing an affected version of Cosmovisor with `DAEMON_ALLOW_DOWNLOAD_BINARIES` set to true, a non-default configuration, it may be possible for an attacker to trigger a Remote Code Execution path as well on the host. In this configuration it is recommended to immediately stop use of the `DAEMON_ALLOW_DOWNLOAD_BINARIES` feature, and then proceed with an upgrade of Cosmovisor. It is recommended that all validators utilizing unsupported versions of Cosmovisor to upgrade to the latest supported versions immediately. If you are utilizing a forked version of Cosmos-SDK, it is recommended to stop use of Cosmovisor until it is possible to update to a…
Excerpt (1199 of 2960 characters). Read the whole post on the forum ↗
Thank you @Jessysaurusrex very much.
This is absolutely an improvement already, and I’m excited to see what comes next.
Also many thanks to Mr. Backwards K. It is very exciting to see external security practitioners working on things in cosmos.
Thank you! If you happen to know of any validators who heavily rely on Cosmovisor for unattended upgrades, it would be immensely helpful to spread the word and to encourage them (and other node operators) double check on what version of the utility they are using as part of their node operations.
This issue was already documented.
That was one of the reasons we released Cosmovisor v1.0.0 and migrated to a new Cosmosvisor design.
That being said, it should be stated that Cosmovisor <v1.0 should not be used.
Thanks for point it.
In first place I would change the command to this one to ensure that we are calling the proper binary:
strings $(which cosmovisor) | grep -q "NEEDED at" && echo "vulnerable" || echo "NOT vulnerable"
People who find it vulnerable should check also the service file to verify the binary path.
By other hand, as complement of your info, we provide here a detailed guide about how to implement (securely) Cosmovisor:
If someone is running < v1.0.0 is very very very outdated and says a lot of him 
Yeah I didn’t really read the version numbers correctly.
This is a lot less of a find than I thought it was
And it’s definitely been reported
I guess the only plus side here is that I do think it’s really good to have these issues out front and center on the forum here
Hi, i have one question: is it possible to run cosmovisor < v1.0.0 for blockchain with cosmos sdk > v0.46.0? I’m unable to find anywhere information about cosmovisor versioning and compatibility with cosmos sdk.
Thanks in advance 
Anecdotally, I am aware of validators running the latest version of Cosmovisor with chains that are still running earlier versions of the SDK than the latest… and validators running old versions of Cosmovisor with later versions of the SDK. So yes, it should be possible to run a newer version of Cosmovisor with an earlier version of the SDK without compatibility issues.
I would recommend testing this out first before committing to it in a mainnet environment, of course.
Re: documenting versioning, I will pass on the feedback and see if there’s a resource that exists, or if there’s room for improvement here.
IIRC, Cosmovisor <1.0 is not compatible with Cosmos SDK v046+ for automatic updates. Cosmovisor v1+ expects a file with plan info, that is produced by app with cosmos sdk v046+