Answer in brief
CVE-2020-37268 records a Unknown severity vulnerability in Coq and Rocq Prover Print Assumptions Omits Unsafe Universe Checking Inlined Through Parameter Inline. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. The current feed maps rocq-prover/rocq (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.
Analysis pending evidence review
HOL Guard separates source facts from reviewed analysis. See the methodology.
A CVSS score is not reported in the current record. The current sources do not mark it as known exploited. Treat this as a source-backed prioritization signal, not a statement about your environment.
Analysis status
Analysis pending evidence review
Factual feed record only; HOL analysis is not approved for indexing. Read the methodology.
The current feed maps rocq-prover/rocq (generic). Check affected ranges and fixed versions before updating.
| Package | Affected range | Fixed version |
|---|---|---|
| rocq-prover/rocqgeneric | 8.11 | Not reported |
Published upstream
Aug 24, 2026
Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:recordSource modified
Aug 24, 2026
Evidence: source:cvelist:source_dates:source-dates:recordFirst seen by HOL
Aug 24, 2026
Print Assumptions does not report that a definition was produced while universe checking was disabled when that definition reaches the caller through Parameter Inline in a module type. Applying a functor inlines the body of the parameter, and the inlining drops the record that the term was built under Unset Universe Checking, so the resulting constant carries no trace of the unsafe operation. A module implementation can therefore prove False using a universe inconsistency, expose it through an inlined parameter, and have Print Assumptions report the dependent proof as closed under the global context. Because Print Assumptions is the in-process audit used to confirm that a development rests on no unexpected assumptions, a dependency built this way passes that audit while proving arbitrary propositions. The standalone checker coqchk does reject the resulting compiled file. The project records this in dev/doc/critical-bugs.md under non-fixed bugs and rates the risk as moderate when coqchk is not used.
Quoted source text, attributed separately from HOL analysis.