Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-11412

Memory Safety in Gnu Binutils 2.45

Public PoCMemory Safety
Published
07 October 2025
Modified
12 May 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v4 1.9
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
EPSS Score 0.0019 9th percentile
Risk Priority 15 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-11412 is a low-severity Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer (CWE-119) vulnerability in Gnu Binutils. Its CVSS base score is 1.9 (Low).

Operationally, ranked at the 9th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SI-2 (Flaw Remediation) and AC-6 (Least Privilege) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

A vulnerability has been found in GNU Binutils 2.45. This impacts the function bfd_elf_gc_record_vtentry of the file bfd/elflink.c of the component Linker. The manipulation leads to out-of-bounds read. Local access is required to approach this attack. The exploit has been…

more

disclosed to the public and may be used. The identifier of the patch is 047435dd988a3975d40c6626a8f739a0b2e154bc. To fix this issue, it is recommended to deploy a patch.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2025-11840Same product: Gnu Binutils
CVE-2025-11494Same product: Gnu Binutils
CVE-2025-11081Same product: Gnu Binutils
CVE-2025-11414Same product: Gnu Binutils
CVE-2025-11413Same product: Gnu Binutils
CVE-2025-5245Same product: Gnu Binutils
CVE-2025-1180Same product: Gnu Binutils
CVE-2025-1153Same product: Gnu Binutils
CVE-2025-5244Same product: Gnu Binutils
CVE-2025-1182Same product: Gnu Binutils

Affected Assets

gnu
binutils
2.45

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)
  • SI-2 Flaw Remediation
  • CM-7 Least Functionality
  • AC-6 Least Privilege
Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V17.3.2

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

prevent

Directly requires applying the vendor patch (047435dd...) that eliminates the out-of-bounds read in bfd_elf_gc_record_vtentry.

prevent

Enforces least functionality by disabling or restricting execution of the vulnerable GNU Binutils linker component when untrusted object files are present.

prevent

Limits execution of the local linker to only authorized users/processes, reducing the chance that an attacker can supply a malicious input file.

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.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices (bounds checking, safe APIs, reviews) directly prevent this class of flaw.

ID.RA-01 partial match
prevents

Vulnerability scanning and code analysis directly surface buffer-boundary flaws.

ID.RA-08 partial match
prevents

Receiving and triaging vulnerability disclosures commonly includes buffer-related reports.

PR.AT-02 partial match
prevents

Developer training on secure coding reduces introduction of memory-buffer errors.

PR.PS-02 partial match
prevents

Patching replaces vulnerable code containing buffer-boundary defects.

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.

detects

Security testing in development catches out-of-bounds accesses before release, covering most instances of the weakness.

A.8.15 Logging partial match
detects

Logging can record evidence of an out-of-bounds read but does not prevent the weakness itself.

prevents

Secure development lifecycle mandates memory-safety practices that directly prevent buffer-boundary violations.

prevents

Application security requirements can specify memory-safety rules, but do not prescribe implementation details.

prevents

Secure architecture and engineering principles include memory-safe design patterns that mitigate buffer overflows.

prevents

Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe buffer operations, directly eliminating CWE-119.

References