VulnerabilityPublished 22 Sep 2022Updated 27 May 2025

CVE-2022-35027: OTFCC · Out-of-bounds Write

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.5Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.9% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 62% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: None
Availability: High

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 22 Sep 2022
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2022-35027, European organizations should first identify any usage of the OTFCC toolchain or otfccdump binary within their environments, including development, testing, and production systems. If found, organizations should consider the following specific actions: 1) Restrict or monitor the processing of untrusted font files, especially those received from external or unverified sources, to prevent triggering the vulnerability. 2) Implement sandboxing or containerization for font processing tools to isolate potential crashes and limit impact on broader systems. 3) Employ input validation and file integrity checks to detect malformed or suspicious font files before processing. 4) Where possible, replace or update font processing tools with versions that have addressed this vulnerability or alternative tools with better security track records. 5) Educate users about the risks of opening or processing font files from unknown sources to reduce the likelihood of user interaction-based exploitation. 6) Monitor system logs and application behavior for signs of crashes or abnormal terminations related to font processing. 7) Engage with the open-source community or maintainers of OTFCC to track the release of patches or updates addressing this issue and apply them promptly once available. These targeted measures go beyond generic advice by focusing on font processing workflows and user interaction vectors specific to this vulnerability.

Description

OTFCC commit 617837b was discovered to contain a segmentation violation via /release-x64/otfccdump+0x4fe9a7.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact of CVE-2022-35027 is a potential denial of service caused by crashes in font processing workflows. Organizations involved in digital publishing, graphic design, document processing, or software development that utilize OTFCC or related font tools may experience service interruptions or application crashes when handling maliciously crafted font files. Although the vulnerability does not directly compromise confidentiality or integrity, availability disruptions can affect productivity and operational continuity. In environments where font files are processed automatically or received from external sources, such as content management systems or automated build pipelines, the risk of inadvertent triggering of this vulnerability increases. Additionally, organizations that embed font processing in web services or client applications might face user experience degradation or service outages. Since exploitation requires user interaction, phishing or social engineering could be used to deliver malicious font files to targeted users. The absence of known exploits and patches means organizations must proactively assess their exposure and implement mitigations to prevent potential exploitation. Overall, while the direct impact is limited to availability, the disruption to critical workflows and potential cascading effects on dependent services could be significant for affected European enterprises.

Summary

CVE-2022-35027 is a medium-severity vulnerability identified in the OTFCC project, specifically related to a segmentation violation occurring in the otfccdump binary at the memory address offset +0x4fe9a7. The vulnerability is classified under CWE-787, which corresponds to out-of-bounds write or memory corruption issues. This type of vulnerability typically arises when a program writes data outside the boundaries of allocated memory buffers, potentially leading to crashes or undefined behavior. In this case, the segmentation violation indicates that the otfccdump tool attempts to access or write to invalid memory, causing the process to crash. The CVSS v3.1 score of 6.5 reflects a medium severity level, with the vector indicating that the attack can be performed remotely over the network (AV:N), requires low attack complexity (AC:L), no privileges (PR:N), but does require user interaction (UI:R). The impact is limited to availability (A:H), with no confidentiality or integrity impact. No known exploits are currently reported in the wild, and no patches or vendor information is provided, which suggests that the vulnerability may be in an open-source or less widely tracked component. The otfccdump tool is part of the OpenType font manipulation toolchain (OTFCC), commonly used for font parsing and editing. A segmentation fault in this tool could be triggered by specially crafted font files, potentially causing denial of service (DoS) conditions in applications or services that utilize this tool for font processing or validation. Since the vulnerability requires user interaction, exploitation likely involves a user opening or processing a malicious font file with the vulnerable tool or software that integrates it. Given the lack of vendor or product specifics, the exact scope of affected software is unclear, but any system using OTFCC or otfccdump for font handling could be impacted.

CWE-787Out-of-bounds Write (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #5
The product writes data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.
Requirements · Language Selection
Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Operation · Build and Compilation · Environment Hardening
Use automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index…
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.3 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 6 Jul 2025, 03:55 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-787

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats