Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:NSummary
CVE-2026-49219 is a medium-severity Path Traversal (CWE-22) vulnerability in Imagemagick Imagemagick. Its CVSS base score is 5.5 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploit Public-Facing Application (T1190); ranked at the 3th 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 AC-3 (Access Enforcement) and SI-10 (Information Input Validation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-36185
Vulnerability Data
ImageMagick is free and open-source software used for editing and manipulating digital images. Prior to versions 6.9.13-48 and 7.1.2-24, an incorrect parsing of the filename can result in a policy bypass and read files disallowed by a security policy using…
more
a symlink. This issue has been patched in versions 6.9.13-48 and 7.1.2-24.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
Vuln enables unauthorized local file reads via policy bypass in ImageMagick (often server-side), directly supporting public app exploitation and credential file access.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly enforces the ImageMagick security policy that the symlink+filename parsing flaw bypasses, blocking unauthorized file reads.
Validates and sanitizes untrusted filename input to stop the path traversal and policy-bypass technique described in the CVE.
Enforces information-flow rules between untrusted input and file resources, limiting the impact of the symlink-based read of disallowed files.
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.
PR.AA-05 directly enforces least-privilege authorization that blocks most unauthorized disclosures, yet CWE-200 also arises from logging, error messages, and side-channel paths that access controls alone do not address.
PR.DS-10 mostly prevents CWE-200 by directly eliminating unauthorized access to sensitive data-in-use, yet only partially addresses the weakness because CWE-200 spans many other exposure vectors outside runtime protection.
PR.IR-01's segmentation/zero-trust controls largely eliminate network-level unauthorized access paths that enable exposure, yet CWE-200 spans many additional vectors (API responses, logs, app logic) that network controls alone cannot close.
PR.PS-06's SDLC practices directly require secure coding and input handling that blocks command-injection defects, yet the single broad outcome leaves many specific neutralization vectors and verification gaps unaddressed.
PR.AA-01 supplies proper credential lifecycle controls that reduce unauthorized access paths, yet leaves many other exposure vectors (error messages, logging, side channels, etc.) unaddressed.
Authentication verifies actor identity and is a prerequisite for access decisions, yet addresses only one facet of the broad set of exposure vectors in CWE-200.
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.
Restricting anonymous or unknown access and encrypting high-value information limits the exposure of sensitive data that would otherwise be obtainable by unauthorized actors.
Suppressing system details, error specifics, and previous log-on information until successful authentication reduces the information an unauthenticated attacker can gather.
By requiring owners to assign sensitivity labels and corresponding handling rules, the control ensures that information is not left unmarked and therefore reduces the chance that sensitive data will be exposed to unauthorized actors.
Requiring encryption, access controls, and recipient authentication for transfers directly reduces the chance that sensitive data reaches an unauthorized observer.
Secure delivery, protected storage, and confidentiality of allocation records limit exposure of authentication material to unauthorized observers.
Requiring defined procedures, assigned roles, and technical/organizational measures for handling PII reduces the chance that sensitive personal data will be exposed to unauthorized actors through inadequate handling or missing safeguards.