CVE-2026-25799
Imagemagick ≤ 6.9.13-40
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:LCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-25799 is a medium-severity Divide By Zero (CWE-369) vulnerability in Imagemagick Imagemagick. Its CVSS base score is 5.3 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Endpoint Denial of Service (T1499); ranked at the 31th 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.
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-2026-25799 is a logic error in the YUV sampling factor validation within ImageMagick, a free and open-source software suite for editing and manipulating digital images. In versions prior to 7.1.2-15 (for the 7.x branch) and 6.9.13-40 (for the 6.x branch), an invalid sampling factor can bypass validation checks, leading to a division-by-zero error during image loading. This vulnerability, classified under CWE-369 (Divide by Zero), carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 5.3 (AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L), indicating medium severity primarily due to its impact on availability.
The vulnerability can be exploited remotely by unauthenticated attackers with network access, requiring low complexity and no user interaction. By crafting a malicious image file with an invalid YUV sampling factor and inducing a targeted ImageMagick instance to load it—such as through a web application or image processing pipeline—the attacker triggers a reliable denial-of-service, causing the application process to crash without affecting confidentiality or integrity.
The official ImageMagick GitHub security advisory (GHSA-543g-8grm-9cw6) confirms that versions 7.1.2-15 and 6.9.13-40 address the issue with a targeted patch to properly validate YUV sampling factors. Security practitioners should update to these versions or later and consider disabling untrusted image processing features in affected deployments until patching is complete.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-7441
Vulnerability Data
ImageMagick is free and open-source software used for editing and manipulating digital images. Prior to versions 7.1.2-15 and 6.9.13-40, a logic error in YUV sampling factor validation allows an invalid sampling factor to bypass checks and trigger a division-by-zero during…
more
image loading, resulting in a reliable denial-of-service. Versions 7.1.2-15 and 6.9.13-40 contain a patch.
- 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 (including static/dynamic analysis) finds divide-by-zero conditions after they have been coded.
Security engineering principles can require safe-arithmetic constructs or explicit guards that keep division operands nonzero.
Validating numeric inputs before use as divisors structurally blocks zero values from reaching division operations.
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 include code analysis, input validation, and testing that prevent divide-by-zero errors.
Vulnerability identification processes can discover divide-by-zero flaws via static analysis or testing.
Routine patching and replacement can remediate divide-by-zero bugs present in deployed software.
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 divide-by-zero conditions before release.
Secure development lifecycle includes input validation and error-handling practices that can prevent divide-by-zero faults.
Application security requirements can mandate checks for zero denominators and safe arithmetic handling.
Secure architecture principles encourage defensive coding patterns that avoid arithmetic exceptions.
Secure coding standards directly require validation to prevent divide-by-zero and similar runtime faults.