Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-33905 is a medium-severity Out-of-bounds Read (CWE-125) vulnerability in Imagemagick Imagemagick. Its CVSS base score is 5.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 9th 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-2026-33905 is an out-of-bounds read vulnerability in ImageMagick, a free and open-source software suite for editing and manipulating digital images. The flaw affects the `-sample` operation in versions prior to 7.1.2-19 and 6.9.13-44, where a specific offset set via the `sample:offset` define triggers the issue. Rated at CVSS 5.5 (CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H) and mapped to CWE-125 (Out-of-bounds Read), it was published on 2026-04-13.
A local attacker with no privileges can exploit this vulnerability by tricking a user into processing a specially crafted image file using ImageMagick's `-sample` operation with a malicious `sample:offset` define. This requires low-complexity attack steps and user interaction, such as opening the file in an application that invokes ImageMagick. Successful exploitation results in high-impact availability disruption, potentially causing application crashes or denial of service, with no confidentiality or integrity impacts.
ImageMagick advisories recommend updating to fixed versions 6.9.13-44 or 7.1.2-19, as detailed in the GitHub security advisory GHSA-pcvx-ph33-r5vv and the relevant commit cca607366fb38c2dde019a9088b8415ffba3a835. The release notes for 7.1.2-19 confirm the patch, and downstream projects like Magick.NET have addressed it in version 14.12.0.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-22108
Vulnerability Data
ImageMagick is free and open-source software used for editing and manipulating digital images. In versions below both 7.1.2-19 and 6.9.13-44, the -sample operation has an out of bounds read when an specific offset is set through the `sample:offset` define that…
more
could lead to an out of bounds read. This issue has been fixed in versions 6.9.13-44 and 7.1.2-19.
- 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 directly finds out-of-bounds read flaws through static analysis, fuzzing, and dynamic bounds checks.
Secure engineering principles require bounds checking and memory-safe constructs that stop out-of-bounds reads from being introduced.
Process isolation confines the effects of an out-of-bounds read to the compromised process.
Input validation rejects malformed indices or lengths that would otherwise cause reads outside buffer bounds.
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 such as bounds checking and memory-safe languages directly prevent out-of-bounds reads.
Vulnerability scanning and recording can discover instances of out-of-bounds reads after code is deployed.
Routine patching replaces vulnerable code containing out-of-bounds read flaws.
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 and acceptance includes fuzzing and static analysis that detect out-of-bounds read defects before release.
Logging can record evidence of an out-of-bounds read but does not prevent the weakness itself.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and bounds checking that directly prevent out-of-bounds reads.
Application security requirements include explicit bounds and memory-safety specifications that mitigate buffer over-reads.
Secure system architecture and engineering principles require memory-safe design patterns and runtime protections against out-of-bounds access.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe pointer arithmetic and mandate bounds-checked reads, eliminating CWE-125.