Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-53466

Memory Safety in Imagemagick ≤ 6.9.13-51

Published
01 July 2026
Modified
02 July 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 6.5
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:L
EPSS Score 0.0022 13th percentile
Risk Priority 35 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2026-53466 is a medium-severity Integer Overflow or Wraparound (CWE-190) vulnerability in Imagemagick Imagemagick. Its CVSS base score is 6.5 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Application or System Exploitation (T1499.004); ranked at the 13th 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 SI-2 (Flaw Remediation) and RA-5 (Vulnerability Monitoring and Scanning) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

ImageMagick is free and open-source software used for editing and manipulating digital images. Prior to versions 6.9.13-51 and 7.1.2-26, an integer overflow in the XCF decoder can result in an out of bounds read when a crafted image is read,…

more

potentially resulting in a crash. This issue has been fixed in versions 6.9.13-51 and 7.1.2-26.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI

T1499.004 Application or System Exploitation Impact
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities that can cause an application or system to crash and deny availability to users.
Why these techniques?

Integer overflow leading to OOB read and application crash directly enables Endpoint DoS via software exploitation (T1499.004).

Confidence: HIGH · MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise v19.0

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-25989Same product: Imagemagick Imagemagick
CVE-2026-56363Same product: Imagemagick Imagemagick
CVE-2025-69204Same product: Imagemagick Imagemagick
CVE-2025-62594Same product: Imagemagick Imagemagick
CVE-2026-33902Same product: Imagemagick Imagemagick
CVE-2025-55160Same product: Imagemagick Imagemagick
CVE-2026-25795Same product: Imagemagick Imagemagick
CVE-2026-26983Same product: Imagemagick Imagemagick
CVE-2026-53460Same product: Imagemagick Imagemagick
CVE-2026-56365Same product: Imagemagick Imagemagick

Affected Assets

imagemagick
imagemagick
≤ 6.9.13-51 · 7.0.0-0 — 7.1.2-26

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)
  • SI-2 Flaw Remediation
  • SI-10 Information Input Validation
Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)
  • RA-5 Vulnerability Monitoring and Scanning
Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V5.2.6

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

prevent

Directly requires timely application of the vendor patch that eliminates the integer overflow in the XCF decoder.

prevent

Mandates validation of image inputs before decoding, which can reject malformed XCF files that trigger the overflow.

detect

Requires scanning to discover instances of the vulnerable ImageMagick versions before exploitation occurs.

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.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly require use of safe arithmetic, bounds checks, and testing that prevent integer overflows.

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.

detects

Security testing in development can detect integer overflows before release.

prevents

Secure SDLC mandates input validation and arithmetic checks that prevent integer overflows.

degrades

Application security requirements include bounds checking and safe arithmetic to avoid overflow conditions.

degrades

Secure architecture principles require defensive coding patterns that mitigate integer wraparound risks.

prevents

Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe integer operations and mandate overflow-safe constructs.

References