Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/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-2025-8177 is a medium-severity Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer (CWE-119) vulnerability in Libtiff Libtiff. Its CVSS base score is 4.8 (Medium).
Operationally, ranked at the 19th 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 CM-7 (Least Functionality) and SI-2 (Flaw Remediation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-22770
Vulnerability Data
A vulnerability was found in LibTIFF up to 4.7.0. It has been rated as critical. This issue affects the function setrow of the file tools/thumbnail.c. The manipulation leads to buffer overflow. An attack has to be approached locally. The patch…
more
is named e8c9d6c616b19438695fd829e58ae4fde5bfbc22. It is recommended to apply a patch to fix this issue. This vulnerability only affects products that are no longer supported by the maintainer.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Insufficient information to map techniques.CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly addresses the buffer overflow by requiring application of the vendor patch e8c9d6c6 that fixes setrow in thumbnail.c.
Disables or removes the vulnerable thumbnail.c tool (or the entire LibTIFF package) when it is not required, eliminating the attack surface.
Applies memory protections (e.g., ASLR, non-executable stack) that make successful exploitation of the CWE-119/120 overflow far more difficult on local execution.
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.
Secure coding directly requires bounds-checked memory operations, addressing the root cause of CWE-120.
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.