CVE-2025-1052
Memory Safety in Mintty Project Mintty ≤ 3.7.5
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2025-1052 is a high-severity Heap-based Buffer Overflow (CWE-122) vulnerability in Mintty Project Mintty. 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 42% 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.
Mintty contains a heap-based buffer overflow vulnerability in its sixel image parsing code that can lead to remote code execution. The flaw, tracked as ZDI-CAN-23382, stems from insufficient validation of the length of attacker-supplied data before it is copied into a heap buffer, allowing an out-of-bounds write. Affected installations are those of the Mintty terminal emulator; the issue is rated CVSS 8.8 with network attack vector and requires user interaction.
An unauthenticated remote attacker can exploit the vulnerability by persuading a target to visit a malicious web page or open a malicious file containing a crafted sixel image. Successful exploitation grants arbitrary code execution in the context of the current user, with impacts covering confidentiality, integrity, and availability.
The Zero Day Initiative advisory ZDI-25-084 addresses the issue and is the primary public reference for affected Mintty versions and remediation steps. The EPSS score rose from a low baseline to a peak of 0.0405, indicating that exploitation interest increased after disclosure and that the vulnerability merits renewed attention.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-1979
Vulnerability Data
Mintty Sixel Image Parsing Heap-based Buffer Overflow Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of Mintty. User interaction is required to exploit this vulnerability in that the target must visit a…
more
malicious page or open a malicious file. The specific flaw exists within the parsing of sixel images. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of the length of user-supplied data prior to copying it to a heap-based buffer. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the current user. Was ZDI-CAN-23382.
- 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.