Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-30929 is a high-severity Stack-based Buffer Overflow (CWE-121) vulnerability in Imagemagick Imagemagick. Its CVSS base score is 7.7 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 1th 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 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-2026-30929 is a stack buffer overflow vulnerability in the MagnifyImage function of ImageMagick, a free and open-source software suite for editing and manipulating digital images. The issue affects versions prior to 7.1.2-16 (for the 7.x series) and 6.9.13-41 (for the 6.x series), where processing a specially crafted image can overflow a fixed-size stack buffer, leading to stack corruption. It is rated 7.7 on the CVSS v3.1 scale (AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:H) and is associated with CWE-121 (Stack-based Buffer Overflow) and CWE-787 (Out-of-bounds Write).
A local attacker with no privileges required can exploit this vulnerability with low complexity and no user interaction by supplying a malicious image to an ImageMagick instance processing it, such as through command-line tools like 'magick' or libraries in applications. Successful exploitation enables high-impact integrity and availability violations, potentially allowing arbitrary code execution, denial of service, or other stack corruption effects, while confidentiality remains unaffected due to the unchanged scope.
The ImageMagick security advisory at https://github.com/ImageMagick/ImageMagick/security/advisories/GHSA-rqq8-jh93-f4vg details the fix in versions 7.1.2-16 and 6.9.13-41, recommending immediate upgrades for affected systems. Practitioners should verify deployments, especially in automated image processing pipelines, and consider input validation or sandboxing as interim mitigations until patching.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-10395
Vulnerability Data
ImageMagick is free and open-source software used for editing and manipulating digital images. Prior to versions 7.1.2-16 and 6.9.13-41, MagnifyImage uses a fixed-size stack buffer. When using a specific image it is possible to overflow this buffer and corrupt the…
more
stack. This vulnerability is fixed in 7.1.2-16 and 6.9.13-41.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 2 hardening rules · 2 OS baselines
—
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and analysis can discover stack-buffer overflows before deployment.
Input validation directly stops untrusted data from exceeding stack buffer bounds.
Memory-protection mechanisms limit the ability to execute injected code after a stack overflow.
Requiring documented secure-development standards and tools can mandate bounds-checked coding practices that avoid the weakness.
Secure-engineering principles include bounds-checked coding and safe buffer handling that avoid introducing the 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-development practices directly prevent introduction of stack buffer overflows.
Vulnerability scanning can discover stack buffer overflows but does not prevent their introduction.
Patching eliminates known instances of the weakness after discovery.
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 (fuzzing, static analysis) detects stack overflows before release.
Secure SDLC mandates buffer-safety practices that directly prevent stack overflows.
Application security requirements can specify buffer-size and input-validation rules.
Secure architecture principles include memory-safety and least-privilege stack usage.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe buffer handling that causes CWE-121.
Change management can enforce review gates that catch unsafe memory operations before deployment.
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).
Oracle Linux 8 (1 rule)
- V-248594 OL 8 must implement address space layout randomization (ASLR) to protect its memory from unauthorized code execution. prevents CWE-121
Oracle Linux 9 (1 rule)
- V-271452 OL 9 must use a Linux Security Module configured to enforce limits on system services. prevents CWE-121