CVE-2025-5202VulnerabilityPublished 26 May 2025Updated 28 May 2025

CVE-2025-5202: Open Asset Import Library Assimp · Out-of-Bounds Read

Affects Open Asset Import Library AssimpSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.8 Medium.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

4.8Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 22% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:N/VI:N/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None
Vulnerable system integrity: None
Vulnerable system availability: Low
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

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

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable system 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 through terminal emulation (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., using social engineering techniques to trick a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
Attack Complexity: Low: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker requires privileges that provide basic capabilities that are typically limited to settings and resources owned by a single low-privileged user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system 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 Vulnerable System 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 Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 26 May 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

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubassimp/assimp`pkg:github/assimp/assimp`Other threats	Affected =5.4.3	Fixed in–

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

AI-suggested

European organizations should implement a multi-layered mitigation approach: 1) Inventory and identify all software components and products using Assimp 5.4.3, especially those handling Half-Life MDL files or similar assets. 2) Monitor vendor communications and the Assimp project repository for forthcoming patches addressing this and related fuzzer-discovered vulnerabilities, and prioritize timely updates once available. 3) Restrict local access to systems running vulnerable versions to trusted personnel only, employing strict access controls and monitoring for anomalous behavior. 4) Employ application-level sandboxing or containerization to limit the impact of potential crashes or memory disclosures caused by out-of-bounds reads. 5) Conduct code reviews or static analysis on in-house software integrating Assimp to detect and remediate unsafe handling of model files. 6) Educate users and administrators about the risks of opening untrusted or malformed 3D asset files locally. 7) Implement endpoint detection and response (EDR) solutions to detect exploitation attempts or unusual application behavior. These targeted measures go beyond generic advice by focusing on controlling local access, proactive patch management, and containment strategies specific to the nature of this vulnerability.

Description

A vulnerability was found in Open Asset Import Library Assimp 5.4.3. It has been declared as problematic. Affected by this vulnerability is the function HL1MDLLoader::validate_header of the file assimp/code/AssetLib/MDL/HalfLife/HL1MDLLoader.cpp. The manipulation leads to out-of-bounds read. An attack has to be approached locally. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The project decided to collect all Fuzzer bugs in a main-issue to address them in the future.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2025-5202 depends largely on the extent to which Assimp 5.4.3 is integrated into their software ecosystems, particularly in industries such as gaming, simulation, virtual reality, and 3D modeling. The out-of-bounds read vulnerability could lead to application crashes or potential leakage of sensitive memory contents, which might expose confidential data or intellectual property. Although the vulnerability requires local access, insider threats or compromised user accounts could exploit it to destabilize critical applications or gain limited information disclosure. In sectors like defense, automotive, or manufacturing where 3D modeling and simulation are prevalent, this could disrupt workflows or reveal proprietary design data. Additionally, software development companies distributing products with embedded Assimp libraries could face reputational damage and increased support costs if exploited. However, since the vulnerability does not allow remote exploitation or privilege escalation, the overall risk to large-scale network compromise is limited. The medium severity rating reflects this moderate risk profile, but organizations should remain vigilant due to the public disclosure and potential for future exploit development.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 11 Jul 2025, 10:18 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats