VulnerabilityPublished 28 Oct 2025Updated 29 Oct 2025

CVE-2025-61043: Out-of-bounds Read

Source CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 9.1 Critical.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 10:12 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

9.1Critical

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 39% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

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

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

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
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: 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: 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 28 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

AI-suggested

Monitor vendor communications closely and apply official patches or updates for Monkey's Audio as soon as they become available.
Until patches are released, restrict or disable processing of untrusted or unauthenticated audio files using Monkey's Audio software, especially those containing UTF-8 encoded metadata.
Implement input validation and sanitization controls at the application or network level to detect and block malformed or suspicious audio files that could trigger out-of-bounds reads.
Employ application whitelisting and sandboxing techniques to limit the impact of crashes or data leaks caused by exploitation attempts.
Conduct regular security assessments and fuzz testing on audio processing components to identify similar memory safety issues proactively.
Educate users and administrators about the risks of opening or processing audio files from unknown or untrusted sources.
Monitor logs and system behavior for signs of crashes or anomalous activity related to audio processing applications.
Consider deploying network-level protections such as file type filtering or antivirus scanning to intercept malicious audio files before they reach vulnerable endpoints.
For organizations with embedded devices using Monkey's Audio, coordinate with device manufacturers to ensure firmware updates address this vulnerability.
Maintain robust incident response plans to quickly contain and remediate any exploitation attempts.

Description

An out-of-bounds read vulnerability has been discovered in Monkey's Audio 11.31, specifically in the CAPECharacterHelper::GetUTF16FromUTF8 function. The issue arises from improper handling of the length of the input UTF-8 string, causing the function to read past the memory boundary. This vulnerability may result in a crash or expose sensitive data.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2025-61043 can be significant, particularly for those involved in media production, broadcasting, digital archiving, or any sector that uses Monkey's Audio software for audio compression or playback. The vulnerability can lead to denial of service through application crashes, disrupting workflows and potentially causing data loss or downtime. More critically, the out-of-bounds read may expose sensitive data residing in memory, which could include confidential audio metadata or other in-memory information, posing confidentiality risks. Since exploitation requires no authentication or user interaction and can be triggered remotely by processing a malicious audio file, the attack surface is broad. This increases the likelihood of exploitation in environments where untrusted audio files are received or processed, such as email attachments, file sharing platforms, or public-facing media services. The lack of known exploits in the wild currently reduces immediate risk but does not eliminate it, as proof-of-concept exploits could emerge rapidly. The disruption of media services could have reputational and operational impacts, especially for broadcasters and content distributors. Additionally, organizations handling sensitive audio content, such as legal or governmental bodies, may face increased risk of data leakage. The vulnerability also poses risks to embedded systems or consumer devices in Europe that use Monkey's Audio codec implementations, potentially affecting availability and confidentiality in those contexts.

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

tzh00203.notion.site/Monkey-s-Audio-Out-of-Bounds-Read-Vulnerability-Report-version-11-31-249b5c52018a80739852d0d9660994c9?source=copy_link (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 5 Nov 2025, 02:16 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-125

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats