Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:N/I:L/A:HSummary
CVE-2025-54574 is a critical-severity Heap-based Buffer Overflow (CWE-122) vulnerability in Squid-Cache Squid. Its CVSS base score is 9.3 (Critical).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked in the top 2% 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.
Squid, a widely used caching proxy for the Web, contains a heap buffer overflow vulnerability in versions 6.3 and earlier that stems from incorrect buffer management during URN processing. The flaw is tracked as CVE-2025-54574 and carries a CVSS 3.1 score of 9.3, reflecting network-accessible attack vectors with low complexity and no required authentication. It has been corrected in release 6.4.
An unauthenticated remote attacker can supply a crafted URN that triggers the overflow, resulting in a heap corruption condition that may be leveraged for remote code execution or at least denial-of-service and limited integrity impact with changed scope.
Official sources, including the Squid GitHub security advisory GHSA-w4gv-vw3f-29g3, the 6.4 release notes, and distribution lists such as Debian LTS and oss-security, confirm the patch and recommend disabling URN access permissions as an immediate workaround until upgrades can be applied. The associated EPSS score remains flat at 0.0932 with no observed upward trajectory after disclosure.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-23392
Vulnerability Data
Squid is a caching proxy for the Web. In versions 6.3 and below, Squid is vulnerable to a heap buffer overflow and possible remote code execution attack when processing URN due to incorrect buffer management. This has been fixed in…
more
version 6.4. To work around this issue, disable URN access permissions.
- 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.