CVE-2025-10921
Description
A heap-based buffer-overflow in GIMP’s HDR (RGBE) file parsing (CVE-2025-10921 / ZDI-25-910) allows an attacker to execute arbitrary code when a user opens or is tricked into previewing a malicious HDR file. The flaw is caused by missing length validation before copying user-supplied HDR data into a heap buffer, enabling memory corruption and control of program flow.
Statement
This vulnerability is Important because it enables remote code execution in the context of the user’s GIMP process with relatively low prerequisites: an attacker only needs to supply a crafted HDR file and get the victim to open or preview it. Heap overflows in image-parsing code are especially dangerous because image loaders commonly operate on untrusted files and often run in the same process as the application’s UI and plugins; a successful overwrite of heap metadata or adjacent control data can lead to arbitrary instruction-pointer control (RCE). Although exploitation requires user interaction (opening/preview), the attack surface is large (attachments, downloads, web previews) and the payload can execute with the user’s privileges, potentially leading to system compromise or lateral movement if the user has elevated access.
Mitigation
No mitigation is currently available that meets Red Hat Product Security’s standards for usability, deployment, applicability, or stability.
Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) Score Details
Info alert:Important note
CVSS scores for open source components depend on vendor-specific factors (e.g. version or build chain). Therefore, Red Hat's score and impact rating can be different from NVD and other vendors. Red Hat remains the authoritative CVE Naming Authority (CNA) source for its products and services (see Red Hat classifications).
CVSS v3 Score Breakdown
| Red Hat | NVD | cve.org | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Base Score | 7.8 | N/A | 7.8 |
| Attack Vector | Local | N/A | Local |
| Attack Complexity | Low | N/A | Low |
| Privileges Required | None | N/A | None |
| User Interaction | Required | N/A | Required |
| Scope | Unchanged | N/A | Unchanged |
| Confidentiality | High | N/A | High |
| Integrity Impact | High | N/A | High |
| Availability Impact | High | N/A | High |
Vector
Red Hat: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
cve.org: CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Understanding the Weakness (CWE)
Availability
Technical Impact: DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart; DoS: Resource Consumption (CPU); DoS: Resource Consumption (Memory)
Buffer overflows generally lead to crashes. Other attacks leading to lack of availability are possible, including putting the program into an infinite loop.
Integrity,Confidentiality,Availability,Access Control
Technical Impact: Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands; Bypass Protection Mechanism; Modify Memory
Buffer overflows often can be used to execute arbitrary code, which is usually outside the scope of a program's implicit security policy. Besides important user data, heap-based overflows can be used to overwrite function pointers that may be living in memory, pointing it to the attacker's code. Even in applications that do not explicitly use function pointers, the run-time will usually leave many in memory. For example, object methods in C++ are generally implemented using function pointers. Even in C programs, there is often a global offset table used by the underlying runtime.
Integrity,Confidentiality,Availability,Access Control,Other
Technical Impact: Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands; Bypass Protection Mechanism; Other
When the consequence is arbitrary code execution, this can often be used to subvert any other security service.
Frequently Asked Questions
Not sure what something means? Check out our Security Glossary.
Want to get errata notifications? Sign up here.
