CVE-2023-3745VulnerabilityPublished 24 Jul 2023Updated 20 Nov 2025

CVE-2023-3745: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 · Out-of-bounds Read

Affects Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.5 Medium.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.5Medium

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 39% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Local
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: Local: The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
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 24 Jul 2023
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 2026-10-25.

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 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-2023-3745, organizations should first verify if ImageMagick is installed on Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 systems and identify the affected versions. Applying vendor-supplied patches or upgrading ImageMagick to a version where the vulnerability is fixed is the most effective measure. If patches are unavailable, consider disabling or restricting ImageMagick usage on critical systems or isolating affected applications to limit impact. Implement strict local user permissions to prevent unauthorized users from executing or opening untrusted image files. Educate users about the risks of opening files from untrusted sources, especially images, to reduce the likelihood of social engineering exploitation. Additionally, monitor system logs for application crashes related to ImageMagick and establish incident response procedures to quickly address denial of service events. For legacy systems that cannot be updated promptly, consider compensating controls such as application whitelisting and sandboxing.

Description

A heap-based buffer overflow issue was found in ImageMagick's PushCharPixel() function in quantum-private.h. This issue may allow a local attacker to trick the user into opening a specially crafted file, triggering an out-of-bounds read error and allowing an application to crash, resulting in a denial of service.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2023-3745 is denial of service through application crashes when processing specially crafted image files. For European organizations, this can disrupt services that rely on ImageMagick for image processing, such as web servers, content management systems, or internal tools. Although the vulnerability does not compromise confidentiality or integrity, repeated crashes could lead to operational downtime, affecting business continuity and user experience. Organizations in sectors like manufacturing, telecommunications, or government that maintain legacy Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 systems may face increased risk due to slower patch cycles and legacy software dependencies. The requirement for local access and user interaction limits remote exploitation but does not eliminate risk from insider threats or social engineering attacks. The absence of known exploits reduces immediate threat but does not preclude future exploitation attempts.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 20 Nov 2025, 19:05 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats