VulnerabilityPublished 17 Oct 2025Updated 20 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-60360: radare2 · Memory Leak

Affects radare2Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.5 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 17:16 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.5Medium

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 5% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: None
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: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
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: 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 17 Oct 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
GitHubradareorg/radare2`pkg:github/radareorg/radare2`Other threats	Affected <=5.9.8	Fixed in–

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

AI-suggested

Restrict local access to systems running radare2 to trusted users only, minimizing the risk of exploitation by unauthorized personnel.
Monitor memory usage of radare2 processes, especially those invoking subprocess initialization, to detect abnormal resource consumption early.
Employ containerization or sandboxing techniques to isolate radare2 executions, limiting the impact of memory leaks on host systems.
Regularly update radare2 to the latest versions once patches addressing CVE-2025-60360 become available.
Implement system-level resource limits (e.g., cgroups on Linux) to prevent any single process from exhausting system memory.
Educate security and development teams about the vulnerability and encourage cautious use of radare2 subprocess features.
Consider alternative tools or workflows temporarily if radare2 usage is critical and patches are delayed.
Maintain robust logging and alerting on system performance anomalies related to radare2 activity.

Description

radare2 v5.9.8 and before contains a memory leak in the function r2r_subprocess_init.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact of CVE-2025-60360 is on availability. Systems running radare2 may experience degraded performance or denial of service due to memory exhaustion if the vulnerable function is invoked repeatedly or in long-running processes. This could disrupt security research, malware analysis, or development activities relying on radare2. Confidentiality and integrity are not affected, so data breaches or unauthorized modifications are unlikely. The requirement for local access and low privileges limits remote exploitation risks but does not eliminate insider threats or risks in shared environments. Organizations with dedicated security teams, research labs, or software development units using radare2 are most at risk. The lack of known exploits reduces immediate threat but patching and monitoring remain important to prevent future exploitation. The impact is more operational than strategic but could affect incident response capabilities if radare2 is a critical tool.

CWE-401Missing Release of Memory after Effective Lifetime (opens in a new tab)
Variant weaknessLikelihood of exploit: Medium
The product does not sufficiently track and release allocated memory after it has been used, making the memory unavailable for reallocation and reuse.
Implementation · Libraries or Frameworks
Choose a language or tool that provides automatic memory management, or makes manual memory management less error-prone.
Architecture and Design
Use an abstraction library to abstract away risky APIs. Not a complete solution.
Architecture and Design · Build and Compilation
Consider using the Boehm-Demers-Weiser garbage collector (bdwgc), which can help avoid leaks.
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

github.com/radareorg/radare2/pull/24245 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 24 Oct 2025, 18:16 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-401

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats