CVE-2025-32365VulnerabilityPublished 5 Apr 2025Updated 3 Nov 2025

CVE-2025-32365: freedesktop Poppler · Out-of-bounds Read

Affects freedesktop PopplerSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.0 Medium : upgrade to 25.04.0 when convenient.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.0Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 16% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 25.04.0

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

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

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: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
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: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 5 Apr 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 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

Upgrade debian/poppler to 25.04.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Debiandebian/poppler`pkg:deb/debian/poppler`Other threats	Affected <25.04.0	Fixed in 25.04.0

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2025-32365, European organizations should prioritize upgrading Poppler to version 25.04.0 or later once the patch is released, as this will contain the corrected isOk check and boundary validation. Until then, organizations should implement strict input validation and filtering of PDF files, especially those from untrusted sources, to reduce exposure to crafted malicious documents. Sandboxing PDF rendering processes can limit the impact of potential crashes and prevent broader system compromise. Monitoring logs for application crashes related to PDF processing can help detect exploitation attempts. Additionally, consider deploying application whitelisting and restricting local user permissions to minimize the risk of local exploitation. For environments where upgrading is delayed, isolating PDF processing services and using alternative PDF libraries with no known vulnerabilities may be prudent. Regular vulnerability scanning and patch management processes should be enforced to quickly address this and similar issues.

Description

Poppler before 25.04.0 allows crafted input files to trigger out-of-bounds reads in the JBIG2Bitmap::combine function in JBIG2Stream.cc because of a misplaced isOk check.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact of CVE-2025-32365 is potential denial of service in applications or services that utilize Poppler for PDF rendering. This could disrupt workflows that depend on automated PDF processing, such as document management systems, email gateways scanning attachments, or desktop PDF viewers in enterprise environments. Although the vulnerability does not compromise confidentiality or integrity, repeated crashes or service interruptions could degrade productivity and availability of critical systems. Organizations with Linux-heavy infrastructure or those using open-source PDF tools are more exposed. Additionally, sectors handling large volumes of PDF documents, such as government agencies, legal firms, and financial institutions, may face operational risks. The lack of known exploits reduces immediate threat, but the vulnerability could be leveraged in targeted attacks or combined with other flaws for escalation. Overall, the impact is moderate but warrants timely remediation to maintain service reliability.

CWE-125Out-of-bounds Read (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessCWE Top 25 (2025): #8
The product reads data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
Architecture and Design · Language Selection
Use a language that provides appropriate memory abstractions.
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
Overread Buffers (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

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 3 Nov 2025, 20:17 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-125

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats