`zerovec` vulnerability

[robertbastian]

cc @Manishearth

[tarcieri]

Does it really need to be filed for both crates? If one pulls in the other, that’s sufficient.

[robertbastian]

It's possible (but unlikely) to be in a setup of [email protected] and [email protected]. This is a vulnerable combination.

Edit: zerovec only pulls in zerovec-derive with the derive feature, that could be off with a client manually importing zerovec-derive.

[Manishearth]

@tarcieri the vulns are present in both crates independently: the derive macro doesn't enforce C, packed, and the manual impls in the zerovec crate also don't have C, packed.