Cyber Resilience

CVE-2025-5473

Memory Safety in Gimp ≤ 3.0.4

Memory Safety
Published
06 June 2025
Modified
17 June 2026
CVSS Score v3.1 8.8
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.13 96th percentile
Risk Priority 74 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2025-5473 is a high-severity Integer Overflow or Wraparound (CWE-190) vulnerability in Gimp Gimp. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked in the top 4% 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 SA-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) — 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.

GIMP contains an integer overflow vulnerability during the parsing of ICO image files that stems from insufficient validation of user-supplied data. The flaw, tracked as CVE-2025-5473 and originally reported as ZDI-CAN-26752, affects installations of GIMP and carries a CVSS 3.1 score of 8.8. Successful exploitation can result in remote code execution within the context of the GIMP process.

Remote attackers can trigger the issue by supplying a malicious ICO file that the victim either opens directly or encounters through a web page. No authentication is required, though user interaction is mandatory. The resulting integer overflow occurs before a memory write, allowing arbitrary code execution.

Advisories from the Zero Day Initiative and the GIMP project indicate that the vulnerability is resolved in GIMP 3.0.4. Debian has also published updated packages for affected LTS releases to address the same flaw.

EPSS scores remain low, with a current value of 0.0164 and a peak of 0.0169, indicating limited observed exploitation interest to date.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

GIMP ICO File Parsing Integer Overflow Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of GIMP. User interaction is required to exploit this vulnerability in that the target must visit a malicious…

more

page or open a malicious file. The specific flaw exists within the parsing of ICO files. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of user-supplied data, which can result in an integer overflow before writing to memory. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the current process. Was ZDI-CAN-26752.

CWE(s)
CWE-190

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1068 Exploitation for Privilege Escalation Privilege Escalation
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in an attempt to elevate privileges.
attack.mitre.org →
T1190 Exploit Public-Facing Application Initial Access
Adversaries may attempt to exploit a weakness in an Internet-facing host or system to initially access a network.
attack.mitre.org →
T1203 Exploitation for Client Execution Execution
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in client applications to execute code.
attack.mitre.org →
T1210 Exploitation of Remote Services Lateral Movement
Adversaries may exploit remote services to gain unauthorized access to internal systems once inside of a network.
attack.mitre.org →
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2023-44443Same product: Gimp Gimp
CVE-2026-4150Same product: Gimp Gimp
CVE-2025-10923Same product: Gimp Gimp
CVE-2025-10924Same product: Gimp Gimp
CVE-2026-4154Same product: Gimp Gimp
CVE-2026-2271Same product: Gimp Gimp
CVE-2025-2760Same product: Gimp Gimp
CVE-2026-4151Same product: Gimp Gimp
CVE-2025-14422Same product: Gimp Gimp
CVE-2023-44444Same product: Gimp Gimp

Affected Assets

gimp
gimp
≤ 3.0.4

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

—

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

—

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

—

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V5.2.6

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

SA-11 Developer Testing and Evaluation good match

Developer testing and evaluation (static analysis, fuzzing, unit tests) directly finds integer overflow defects before deployment.

SA-8 Security and Privacy Engineering Principles partial match

Secure engineering principles require use of safe arithmetic constructs or language features that structurally eliminate integer overflow during calculation.

SI-10 Information Input Validation partial match

Input validation enforces bounds on values before arithmetic, stopping the conditions that trigger overflow or wraparound.

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 directly require use of safe arithmetic, bounds checks, and testing that prevent integer overflows.

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.

A.8.29 Security testing in development and acceptance mostly match
finds

Security testing in development can detect integer overflows before release.

A.8.25 Secure development life cycle partial match
prevents

Secure SDLC mandates input validation and arithmetic checks that prevent integer overflows.

A.8.26 Application security requirements partial match
degrades

Application security requirements include bounds checking and safe arithmetic to avoid overflow conditions.

A.8.27 Secure system architecture and engineering principles partial match
degrades

Secure architecture principles require defensive coding patterns that mitigate integer wraparound risks.

A.8.28 Secure coding partial match
prevents

Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe integer operations and mandate overflow-safe constructs.

References