CVE-2025-59800VulnerabilityPublished 22 Sep 2025Updated 23 Sep 2025

CVE-2025-59800: Artifex Ghostscript · Integer Overflow or Wraparound

Affects Artifex GhostscriptSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.3 Medium.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.3Medium

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

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Changed
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: Low
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: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Changed: An exploited vulnerability can affect resources beyond the security scope managed by the security authority of the vulnerable component. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are different and managed by different security authorities.
Confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on 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 22 Sep 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
Artifex Ghostscript	Affected =0	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

European organizations should proactively audit their use of Ghostscript, particularly versions up to 10.05.1, and identify systems where it processes untrusted or external documents. Until an official patch is released, organizations should consider the following mitigations: 1) Restrict access to Ghostscript processing services to trusted users and networks only, minimizing local access by untrusted parties. 2) Implement strict input validation and sandboxing around document processing workflows to isolate Ghostscript execution and limit potential damage from exploitation. 3) Monitor logs for unusual crashes or errors in Ghostscript processes that may indicate exploitation attempts. 4) Where possible, disable OCR-related features if not required, reducing the attack surface. 5) Prepare for rapid patch deployment once a fix is available by maintaining an inventory of affected systems. 6) Employ application whitelisting and endpoint protection solutions that can detect anomalous behavior resulting from memory corruption exploits. These targeted steps go beyond generic advice by focusing on access control, input sanitization, and operational monitoring specific to Ghostscript's OCR functionality.

Description

In Artifex Ghostscript through 10.05.1, ocr_begin_page in devices/gdevpdfocr.c has an integer overflow that leads to a heap-based buffer overflow in ocr_line8.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2025-59800 depends on the extent to which Ghostscript is integrated into their document processing pipelines. Many enterprises, government agencies, and service providers use Ghostscript for PDF rendering, printing services, and automated document workflows. Exploitation could lead to integrity violations, such as arbitrary code execution or process crashes, potentially disrupting critical document handling systems. This could affect sectors like finance, healthcare, legal, and public administration where document integrity and availability are crucial. Since the vulnerability requires local access, the risk is higher in environments where untrusted users or processes can submit documents for processing. The heap overflow could be leveraged to escalate privileges or move laterally within a network if combined with other vulnerabilities. Although no known exploits exist yet, the presence of this vulnerability in a widely deployed open-source tool means attackers may develop exploits in the future, increasing risk over time.

CWE-190Integer Overflow or Wraparound (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: Medium
The product performs a calculation that can produce an integer overflow or wraparound when the logic assumes that the resulting value will always be larger than the original value. This occurs when an integer value is incremented to a value that is too large to store in the associated representation. When this occurs, the value may become a very small or negative number.
Requirements
Ensure that all protocols are strictly defined, such that all out-of-bounds behavior can be identified simply, and require strict conformance to the protocol.
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.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V5.4.3 (opens in a new tab)
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Forced Integer Overflow (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 30 Sep 2025, 01:44 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-190

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats