CVE-2025-64646
Ibm Concert 1.0.0 – 2.2.0
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:NSummary
CVE-2025-64646 is a medium-severity Compiler Removal of Code to Clear Buffers (CWE-14) vulnerability in Ibm Concert. Its CVSS base score is 6.2 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique OS Credential Dumping (T1003); ranked at the 7th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); 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.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-209031
Vulnerability Data
IBM Concert 1.0.0 through 2.2.0 could allow an attacker to access sensitive information in memory due to the buffer not properly clearing resources.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can include static analysis or binary inspection that reveals compiler removal of buffer-clearing stores.
Security engineering principles applied during design and implementation can mandate use of volatile qualifiers, explicit_bzero, or similar techniques that survive dead-store elimination.
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 include compiler-aware mitigations (volatile, memset_s) that prevent this exact weakness.
Explicitly requires removing confidential data from process memory when no longer needed, directly addressing dead-store removal of buffer clears.
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 can detect residual sensitive data left by dead-store removal, but does not prevent the weakness itself.
A secure SDLC can include compiler-flag and code-review requirements that mitigate dead-store removal, yet the control is broader.
Secure coding rules can mandate explicit volatile or memory-clearing patterns that survive compiler optimization.