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-2026-3145 is a medium-severity Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer (CWE-119) vulnerability in Libvips Libvips. Its CVSS base score is 4.8 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Process Injection (T1055); ranked at the 8th 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-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) 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-2026-3145 is a memory corruption vulnerability (CWE-119) affecting libvips versions up to and including 8.18.0. The flaw resides in the functions vips_foreign_load_matrix_file_is_a and vips_foreign_load_matrix_header within the file libvips/foreign/matrixload.c. This issue can be triggered by executing a manipulation that leads to memory corruption.
The vulnerability has a CVSS v3.1 base score of 5.3 (AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L), indicating a medium severity local attack. An attacker with low privileges on the affected system can exploit it without user interaction, achieving low impacts on confidentiality, integrity, and availability through memory corruption.
Mitigation is available via the patch commit d4ce337c76bff1b278d7085c3c4f4725e3aa6ece in the libvips GitHub repository. Additional details are provided in GitHub issue #4876 and pull request #4888, with further information on VulDB (ctiid.347651). Security practitioners should update to a patched version of libvips beyond 8.18.0.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-8586
Vulnerability Data
A flaw has been found in libvips up to 8.18.0. The affected element is the function vips_foreign_load_matrix_file_is_a/vips_foreign_load_matrix_header of the file libvips/foreign/matrixload.c. Executing a manipulation can lead to memory corruption. The attack needs to be launched locally. This patch is called…
more
d4ce337c76bff1b278d7085c3c4f4725e3aa6ece. A patch should be applied to remediate this issue.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V17.3.2
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Secure engineering principles require memory-safe design and coding that structurally avoids buffer-boundary violations.
Input validation directly enforces bounds checking that stops out-of-bounds reads/writes from being introduced or reached.
Memory protection restricts exploitation impact of buffer overflows without eliminating the underlying coding 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 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.
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.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe buffer operations, directly eliminating CWE-119.