CVE-2025-64713
Memory Safety in Bytecodealliance Webassembly Micro Runtime ≤ 2.4.4
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HSummary
CVE-2025-64713 is a medium-severity Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer (CWE-119) vulnerability in Bytecodealliance Webassembly Micro Runtime. Its CVSS base score is 5.1 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Process Injection (T1055); ranked at the 24th 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-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-199655
Vulnerability Data
WebAssembly Micro Runtime (WAMR) is a lightweight standalone WebAssembly (Wasm) runtime. Prior to version 2.4.4, an out-of-bounds array access issue exists in WAMR's fast interpreter mode during WASM bytecode loading. When frame_ref_bottom and frame_offset_bottom arrays are at capacity and a…
more
GET_GLOBAL(I32) opcode is encountered, frame_ref_bottom is expanded but frame_offset_bottom may not be. If this is immediately followed by an if opcode that triggers preserve_local_for_block, the function traverses arrays using stack_cell_num as the upper bound, causing out-of-bounds access to frame_offset_bottom since it wasn't expanded to match the increased stack_cell_num. This issue has been patched in version 2.4.4.
- 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
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.