Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/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:XSummary
CVE-2025-1153 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 2.3 (Low).
Operationally, ranked in the top 32% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; 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 CM-7 (Least Functionality) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-2028
Vulnerability Data
A vulnerability classified as problematic was found in GNU Binutils 2.43/2.44. Affected by this vulnerability is the function bfd_set_format of the file format.c. The manipulation leads to memory corruption. The attack can be launched remotely. The complexity of an attack…
more
is rather high. The exploitation appears to be difficult. Upgrading to version 2.45 is able to address this issue. The identifier of the patch is 8d97c1a53f3dc9fd8e1ccdb039b8a33d50133150. It is recommended to upgrade the affected component.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly requires timely installation of the vendor patch (2.45 / commit 8d97c1a5) that eliminates the memory-corruption flaw in bfd_set_format.
Requires cryptographic or integrity verification of Binutils binaries/libraries so that an unpatched, memory-corruption-vulnerable version cannot be executed without detection.
Enforces least functionality by prohibiting installation or execution of the vulnerable Binutils package unless a documented mission need exists, thereby reducing the attack surface.
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 SDLC practices (bounds checking, safe APIs, reviews) directly prevent this class of flaw.
Vulnerability scanning and code analysis directly surface buffer-boundary flaws.
Receiving and triaging vulnerability disclosures commonly includes buffer-related reports.
Developer training on secure coding reduces introduction of memory-buffer errors.
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.
Security testing in development catches out-of-bounds accesses before release, covering most instances of the weakness.
Secure development lifecycle mandates memory-safety practices that directly prevent buffer-boundary violations.
Application security requirements can specify memory-safety rules, but do not prescribe implementation details.
Secure architecture and engineering principles include memory-safe design patterns that mitigate buffer overflows.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe buffer operations, directly eliminating CWE-119.