CVE-2025-0903
Memory Safety in Pdf-Xchange Editor ≤ 10.4.2.390
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2025-0903 is a high-severity Heap-based Buffer Overflow (CWE-122) vulnerability in Pdf-Xchange Pdf-Xchange Editor. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked in the top 47% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2025-0903 is a heap-based buffer overflow vulnerability in PDF-XChange Editor that occurs during RTF file parsing. The flaw stems from insufficient validation of the length of user-supplied data before it is copied into a fixed-length heap buffer, enabling remote code execution. The affected component is the RTF parser within PDF-XChange Editor installations.
Remote attackers can exploit the issue by supplying a malicious RTF file or hosting one on a web page. Successful exploitation requires the victim to open the file or visit the page, after which arbitrary code runs in the context of the current process. The vulnerability carries a CVSS score of 8.8 and is tracked under CWEs 122 and 787; it was originally reported as ZDI-CAN-25421.
The single advisory reference points to the Zero Day Initiative disclosure for ZDI-25-070, which aligns with the published description but provides no additional mitigation details in the available record. The EPSS score started low, rose materially to a peak of 0.0226 on 2026-03-12, and has since receded to 0.0055, indicating that exploitation interest increased after disclosure.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-1918
Vulnerability Data
PDF-XChange Editor RTF File Parsing Heap-based Buffer Overflow Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of PDF-XChange Editor. User interaction is required to exploit this vulnerability in that the target must…
more
visit a malicious page or open a malicious file. The specific flaw exists within the parsing of RTF files. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of the length of user-supplied data prior to copying it to a fixed-length heap-based buffer. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the current process. Was ZDI-CAN-25421.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.4.1
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation (including fuzzing and memory-error detectors) can discover heap overflows after they have been coded.
Input validation enforces bounds checking on data written to heap buffers, directly stopping the overflow condition from being introduced.
Requiring documented secure-development standards and tools can mandate bounds-checked coding practices that avoid the weakness.
Security engineering principles require use of memory-safe constructs and bounds-checked allocation routines that avoid introducing heap overflows.
Memory-protection mechanisms limit the ability of a heap overflow to execute attacker-controlled code or corrupt adjacent structures.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Secure-development practices directly require bounds checking and safe memory handling that prevent heap overflows.
Vulnerability scanning and recording can discover heap-overflow flaws but does not prevent their introduction in code.
Timely patching removes known heap-overflow instances after they exist.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Security testing in development and acceptance can detect heap overflows before release.
Secure development lifecycle mandates practices that reduce the likelihood of introducing heap overflows.
Application security requirements can specify bounds-checking and safe memory APIs that mitigate heap overflows.
Secure architecture and engineering principles include memory-safety and input-validation controls that address heap overflows.
Secure coding standards directly prescribe techniques (safe functions, bounds checks) that prevent heap-based buffer overflows.
Change management can enforce review gates that catch unsafe memory operations before deployment.