Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-24411 is a high-severity Improper Input Validation (CWE-20) vulnerability in Color Iccdev. Its CVSS base score is 7.1 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); 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-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.
CVE-2026-24411 is an Undefined Behavior vulnerability in the iccDEV libraries and tools, which are used for interacting with, manipulating, and applying ICC color management profiles. The issue resides in the CIccTagXmlSegmentedCurve::ToXml() function and affects versions 2.3.1.1 and prior. It arises when user-controllable input is unsafely incorporated into ICC profile data or other structured binary blobs, leading to potential exploitation. The vulnerability is rated with a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.1 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:L/A:H) and is associated with CWEs 20 (Improper Input Validation), 476 (NULL Pointer Dereference), 690 (Unchecked Return Value to NULL Pointer Dereference), and 758 ( Reliance on Undefined, Unspecified, or Implementation-Defined Behavior).
Remote attackers with no privileges can exploit this vulnerability over the network with low complexity, but it requires user interaction, such as opening a malicious ICC profile. Successful exploitation could result in denial of service (high availability impact), data manipulation (low integrity impact), bypassing application logic, or even code execution, depending on the context of the affected software processing the profile.
Mitigation is available via an update to iccDEV version 2.3.1.2, as detailed in the project's GitHub security advisory (GHSA-x53f-7h27-9fc8), issue tracker (#499), and the fixing commit (d6d6f51a999d4266ec09347cac7e0930d6e02eec). Security practitioners should advise users of affected applications to apply this patch promptly and validate ICC profiles from untrusted sources.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-4604
Vulnerability Data
iccDEV provides libraries and tools for interacting with, manipulating, and applying ICC color management profiles. Versions 2.3.1.1 and below have Undefined Behavior in CIccTagXmlSegmentedCurve::ToXml(). This occurs when user-controllable input is unsafely incorporated into ICC profile data or other structured binary…
more
blobs. Successful exploitation may allow an attacker to perform DoS, manipulate data, bypass application logic and Code Execution. This issue has been fixed in version 2.3.1.2.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 6 hardening rules · 3 OS baselines
—
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation can discover missing input validation through analysis or test cases.
SI-10 directly requires validity checks on information inputs, structurally preventing improper or missing validation.
Requiring documented development standards and tools can embed input-validation practices into the engineering process.
Engineering principles can mandate defensive coding such as explicit null checks before dereference.
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.
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.
Testing against a defined set of requirements and using code review plus vulnerability scanning forces validation of inputs and handling of unanticipated conditions, reducing the chance that malformed data will be accepted.
Secure-coding guidelines and mandatory security testing (including code scans) compel developers to validate and sanitize inputs at design and implementation time, lowering the incidence of malformed or malicious data reaching downstream components.
Mandating input controls that include integrity checks and input validation ensures that untrusted data is examined before use, blocking the root cause of many injection and malformed-data weaknesses.
Security-by-design principles explicitly call for data validation and sanitization at every layer, reducing the chance that malformed or malicious input will be processed without scrutiny.
Requiring language-specific secure coding standards, peer review, SAST and documented mitigation of common programming errors forces validation of all inputs before they are trusted.
Regular automated validation of system software and data content, combined with scanning of all inbound files, enforces input validation at the boundary before untrusted content is processed.
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).
RHEL 8 (1 rule)
- V-230265 RHEL 8 must prevent the installation of software, patches, service packs, device drivers, or operating system components of local packages without verification they have been digitally signed using a certificate that is issued by a Certificate Authority (CA) that is recognized and approved by the organization. prevents CWE-20