Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:H/AT:P/PR:L/UI:A/VC:N/VI:H/VA:L/SC:N/SI:H/SA:L/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:XSummary
CVE-2025-7709 is a medium-severity Integer Overflow or Wraparound (CWE-190) vulnerability. Its CVSS base score is 6.9 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Client Execution (T1203); ranked at the 25th 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 SI-10 (Information Input Validation) and SI-16 (Memory Protection) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-27137
Vulnerability Data
An integer overflow exists in the FTS5 https://sqlite.org/fts5.html extension. It occurs when the size of an array of tombstone pointers is calculated and truncated into a 32-bit integer. A pointer to partially controlled data can then be written out of…
more
bounds.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
Integer overflow OOB write in SQLite FTS5 directly enables memory corruption exploitation for client code execution (T1203) or privilege escalation (T1068).
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Validates input sizes before FTS5 tombstone array calculations to block the 32-bit truncation that enables the out-of-bounds write.
Enforces memory bounds checking and ASLR/guard pages that directly stop exploitation of the pointer write beyond the allocated array.
Requires prompt application of patches that correct the integer-overflow arithmetic inside the FTS5 extension.
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 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.
Security testing in development can detect integer overflows before release.
Secure SDLC mandates input validation and arithmetic checks that prevent integer overflows.
Application security requirements include bounds checking and safe arithmetic to avoid overflow conditions.
Secure architecture principles require defensive coding patterns that mitigate integer wraparound risks.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe integer operations and mandate overflow-safe constructs.