VulnerabilityPublished 25 Mar 2025Updated 3 Nov 2025

CVE-2025-27835: Artifex Ghostscript · Classic Buffer Overflow

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 7.8 High · fixed in 10.05.0 : patch Artifex Ghostscript soon.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 13:47 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

7.8High

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 21% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Affects: Artifex Ghostscript before 10.05.0
Patch: Available – fixed in 10.05.0

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

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
Integrity: High
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: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
Integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to 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 25 Mar 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

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2025-27835, European organizations should prioritize upgrading Artifex Ghostscript to version 10.05.0 or later, where the vulnerability is resolved. Until upgrades are applied, organizations should implement strict input validation and sanitization for all documents processed by Ghostscript to reduce the risk of malicious payloads. Employ sandboxing or containerization techniques to isolate Ghostscript processes, limiting the potential impact of exploitation. Monitoring and logging usage of Ghostscript can help detect anomalous behavior indicative of exploitation attempts. User training to recognize suspicious documents and avoid opening untrusted files is critical due to the required user interaction for exploitation. Additionally, organizations should review and restrict permissions of Ghostscript processes to minimize privilege escalation risks. Regular vulnerability scanning and patch management processes should be enforced to ensure timely updates.

Description

An issue was discovered in Artifex Ghostscript before 10.05.0. A buffer overflow occurs when converting glyphs to Unicode in psi/zbfont.c.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2025-27835 can be substantial, especially in sectors relying heavily on document processing, printing, and publishing workflows that utilize Ghostscript. Exploitation could lead to unauthorized code execution, data leakage, or denial of service, compromising sensitive information and disrupting business operations. Industries such as legal, financial services, government agencies, and media companies are particularly vulnerable due to their frequent handling of complex document formats. Additionally, organizations using Ghostscript in automated document conversion or printing servers may face operational downtime or data integrity issues. The requirement for user interaction means phishing or social engineering could be vectors for exploitation, increasing the risk in environments with less stringent user awareness. The lack of known exploits in the wild currently reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate the threat, especially as attackers may develop exploits following public disclosure.

Summary

CVE-2025-27835 is a buffer overflow vulnerability identified in Artifex Ghostscript, a widely used interpreter for PostScript and PDF files, specifically in versions prior to 10.05.0. The vulnerability arises in the psi/zbfont.c source file during the conversion process of glyphs to Unicode characters. This buffer overflow is classified under CWE-120, indicating a classic memory corruption issue where data exceeding buffer boundaries can overwrite adjacent memory. The vulnerability can be exploited locally without requiring privileges (AV:L), with low attack complexity (AC:L), no privileges required (PR:N), but it does require user interaction (UI:R), such as opening or processing a crafted document. The impact is severe, affecting confidentiality, integrity, and availability (C:H/I:H/A:H), potentially allowing an attacker to execute arbitrary code, crash the application, or escalate privileges. Although no known exploits are currently reported in the wild, the high CVSS score of 7.8 reflects the significant risk posed by this vulnerability. Ghostscript is commonly integrated into document processing pipelines, printing services, and PDF rendering applications, making this vulnerability relevant to many environments that handle PostScript or PDF files. The absence of patch links suggests that remediation involves upgrading to version 10.05.0 or later, where the issue is fixed.

CWE-120Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input ('Classic Buffer Overflow') (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #11
The product copies an input buffer to an output buffer without verifying that the size of the input buffer is less than the size of the output 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
Docker Security (opens in a new tab)
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.4.1 (opens in a new tab)
V14.1.2 (opens in a new tab)
V13.3.1 (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

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 3 Nov 2025, 21:08 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-120

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats