CVE-2025-55298
Imagemagick ≤ 6.9.13-28
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2025-55298 is a high-severity Write-what-where Condition (CWE-123) vulnerability in Imagemagick Imagemagick. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked in the top 10% 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 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.
ImageMagick is an open-source image editing and manipulation library affected by a format string vulnerability in the InterpretImageFilename function. Prior to versions 6.9.13-28 and 7.1.2-2, the function passes unsanitized user input directly to FormatLocaleString, enabling attackers to trigger memory corruption. The flaw is tracked under CWE-134 and CWE-123 and carries a CVSS 3.1 score of 7.5.
An attacker with low privileges and network access can supply a crafted image filename or metadata that overwrites arbitrary memory regions. Successful exploitation can progress from heap corruption to remote code execution, although the attack requires high complexity due to the AC:H rating.
Official patches are available in ImageMagick 6.9.13-28 and 7.1.2-2, with the fix documented in commit 439b362b93c074eea6c3f834d84982b43ef057d5 and the corresponding GitHub Security Advisory GHSA-9ccg-6pjw-x645. Downstream projects such as Magick.NET 14.8.1 and Debian LTS have issued coordinated updates that incorporate the same remediation.
EPSS remains flat at 0.01 with no material increase after disclosure, indicating limited observed exploitation interest to date.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-25836
Vulnerability Data
ImageMagick is free and open-source software used for editing and manipulating digital images. Prior to ImageMagick versions 6.9.13-28 and 7.1.2-2, a format string bug vulnerability exists in InterpretImageFilename function where user input is directly passed to FormatLocaleString without proper sanitization.…
more
An attacker can overwrite arbitrary memory regions, enabling a wide range of attacks from heap overflow to remote code execution. This issue has been patched in versions 6.9.13-28 and 7.1.2-2.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 4 hardening rules · 4 OS baselines
—
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and static analysis can discover format-string vulnerabilities before deployment.
Input validation can reject or sanitize externally supplied format strings before they reach formatting functions.
Memory-protection mechanisms block unauthorized writes to arbitrary locations even if a write-what-where primitive exists.
Secure development standards and tools can mandate use of static format strings or safe formatting APIs.
Secure engineering principles require memory-safe coding and bounds checking that eliminate the root cause of write-what-where flaws.
Process isolation confines the blast radius of an arbitrary write so it cannot affect other domains.
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 directly prevent arbitrary write conditions via safe coding, bounds checking, and memory-safe constructs.
Vulnerability identification can discover existing format-string flaws but does not prevent their introduction.
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 write-what-where conditions before deployment.
Secure development lifecycle practices directly reduce the likelihood of write-what-where flaws such as buffer overflows.
Application security requirements can mandate input validation and bounds checking that mitigate arbitrary write conditions.
Secure architecture and engineering principles discourage unsafe memory handling that leads to write-what-where vulnerabilities.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe buffer operations that enable arbitrary memory writes.
Change management processes help ensure security fixes for such weaknesses are properly deployed.
Hardening callouts derived
Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).
Oracle Linux 8 (1 rule)
- V-248592 OL 8 must clear memory when it is freed to prevent use-after-free attacks. prevents CWE-123
RHEL 8 (1 rule)
- V-230279 RHEL 8 must clear memory when it is freed to prevent use-after-free attacks. prevents CWE-123
Windows 10 (1 rule)
- V-220727 Structured Exception Handling Overwrite Protection (SEHOP) must be enabled. prevents CWE-123
Windows 11 (1 rule)
- V-253284 Structured Exception Handling Overwrite Protection (SEHOP) must be enabled. prevents CWE-123