CVE-2025-1788
Memory Safety in Rizin ≤ 0.8.0
Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/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-2025-1788 is a medium-severity Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer (CWE-119) vulnerability in Rizin Rizin. Its CVSS base score is 4.8 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 22th 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 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-2025-1788 is a heap-based buffer overflow vulnerability affecting the rz_utf8_encode function in the /librz/util/utf8.c library of rizinorg rizin versions up to 0.8.0. Classified as critical, it maps to CWE-119 (Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer) and CWE-122 (Heap-based Buffer Overflow). The issue was published on 2025-03-01.
Exploitation requires local access with low privileges and low attack complexity (CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L, base score 5.3). A local attacker can manipulate input to the affected function, triggering the heap-based buffer overflow and achieving limited impacts on confidentiality, integrity, and availability.
Mitigation is available via a patch in the rizinorg/rizin pull request #4762, as referenced in GitHub issue #4910. A proof-of-concept exploit has been publicly disclosed, including a ZIP file (rz-bin-poc-01.zip) attached to the issue, and may be used by attackers. Additional details are available on vuldb.com/?ctiid.298011.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-5879
Vulnerability Data
A vulnerability, which was classified as critical, was found in rizinorg rizin up to 0.8.0. This affects the function rz_utf8_encode in the library /librz/util/utf8.c. The manipulation leads to heap-based buffer overflow. An attack has to be approached locally. The exploit…
more
has been disclosed to the public and may be used. It is recommended to apply a patch to fix this issue.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V17.3.2V1.4.1
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.
Secure engineering principles require memory-safe design and coding that structurally avoids buffer-boundary violations.
Memory protection restricts exploitation impact of buffer overflows without eliminating the underlying coding flaw.
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 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.
Change management ensures controlled deployment of fixes for discovered heap-overflow vulnerabilities.