VulnerabilityPublished 23 Dec 2025Updated 31 Dec 2025

CVE-2025-14407: Soda PDF Desktop · Memory Buffer Overflow

Affects Soda PDF DesktopSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 3.3 Low.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 14:05 UTC

CVSS 3.0 base score

3.3Low

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 7% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N

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

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: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 23 Dec 2025
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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Soda PDF Desktop	Affected =14.0.509.23030	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Monitor Soda PDF Desktop vendor communications and promptly apply security patches once released for version 14.0.509.23030 or affected versions.
Implement strict controls on PDF file sources by restricting opening PDFs from untrusted or unknown origins, especially via email or web downloads.
Employ endpoint protection solutions capable of detecting and blocking malicious PDF files or suspicious memory corruption behaviors.
Educate users on the risks of opening unsolicited or suspicious PDF attachments and visiting untrusted websites to reduce the likelihood of user interaction exploitation.
Use application whitelisting and sandboxing techniques to limit the impact of potential exploitation within Soda PDF Desktop.
Conduct regular vulnerability assessments and penetration testing focusing on PDF handling applications to identify and remediate similar issues proactively.
Consider network-level protections such as email filtering and web gateway controls to block malicious payload delivery vectors.

Description

Soda PDF Desktop PDF File Parsing Memory Corruption Information Disclosure Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to disclose sensitive information on affected installations of Soda PDF Desktop. User interaction is required to exploit this vulnerability in that the target must visit a malicious page or open a malicious file. The specific flaw exists within the parsing of PDF files. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of user-supplied data, which can result in a memory corruption condition. An attacker can leverage this in conjunction with other vulnerabilities to execute arbitrary code in the context of the current process. Was ZDI-CAN-27141.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact is the potential disclosure of sensitive information contained in memory during PDF parsing by Soda PDF Desktop. This could include confidential documents, credentials, or other sensitive data processed by the application. Although the vulnerability does not directly allow code execution, the possibility of chaining it with other vulnerabilities raises the risk of more severe attacks, including remote code execution. Organizations in sectors such as finance, legal, government, and healthcare that frequently handle sensitive PDF documents are at higher risk. The requirement for user interaction means that social engineering or phishing campaigns could be used to exploit this vulnerability. The low CVSS score indicates limited immediate risk, but the potential for escalation and data leakage warrants attention. The absence of known exploits reduces immediate threat but does not eliminate future risk. Disruption to business operations is unlikely, but confidentiality breaches could lead to regulatory penalties under GDPR if personal data is exposed.

CWE-119Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: High
The product performs operations on a memory buffer, but it reads from or writes to a memory location outside the buffer's intended boundary. This may result in read or write operations on unexpected memory locations that could be linked to other variables, data structures, or internal program data.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
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)
Attack patterns
Buffer Overflow via Environment Variables (opens in a new tab)
Overflow Buffers (opens in a new tab)
Client-side Injection-induced Buffer Overflow (opens in a new tab)
Filter Failure through Buffer Overflow (opens in a new tab)
MIME Conversion (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

zerodayinitiative.com/advisories/ZDI-25-1080/ (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 31 Dec 2025, 22:18 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-119

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats