CVE-2025-5099
Memory Safety in Dynamixsoftware Printershare ≤ 12.15.01
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2025-5099 is a critical-severity Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer (CWE-119) vulnerability in Dynamixsoftware Printershare. Its CVSS base score is 9.8 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 45th 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 SA-15 (Development Process, Standards, and Tools) — 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.
An out-of-bounds write vulnerability, tracked as CVE-2025-5099 and also associated with CWE-119 and CWE-787, affects a native library during PDF rendering. The flaw can produce memory corruption that leads to arbitrary code execution and is rated 9.8 under CVSS 3.1 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H).
An unauthenticated attacker can trigger the issue remotely over the network with no user interaction required, enabling memory corruption and potential arbitrary code execution on the target system.
Public advisories referenced at https://korelogic.com/Resources/Advisories/KL-001-2025-004.txt describe the condition.
The EPSS score remains flat at a low 0.0104 with no material rise observed after disclosure.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-28382
Vulnerability Data
An Out of Bounds Write occurs when the native library attempts PDF rendering, which can be exploited to achieve memory corruption and potentially arbitrary code execution.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V17.3.2
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation (including fuzzing and bounds checks) finds out-of-bounds write flaws before deployment.
Requiring documented secure-development standards and tools can mandate bounds-checked coding practices that avoid the weakness.
Secure engineering principles require memory-safe design and coding that structurally avoids buffer-boundary violations.
Input validation directly enforces bounds checking that stops out-of-bounds reads/writes from being introduced or reached.
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 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.
Change management can enforce review gates that catch unsafe memory operations before deployment.