I'm surprised that CLN-003 made the list even as low severity. It's intended to make reverse engineering of the binary harder, but the code is already freely accessible (and CLN-003 also acknowledges this).
That vulnerability seems like something added to adhere to the rule of 3. In at least Western culture, we have this ingrained thing for groups of 3 - for example Trinity, 3 point outline, 3 sentences in a paragraph etc.
It seems like this was picked to end up with 3 vulnerabilities so the security researchers can feel they did a complete job.
I see it as a note to be exhaustive. It’s the kind of thing if you don’t add it to your report, some smart ass WILL say something like « actually they forgot about the bin symbols, how could they miss this? ». There’s always someone like this.
