CVE-2025-68431VulnerabilityPublished 29 Dec 2025Updated 30 Dec 2025

CVE-2025-68431: strukturag libheif · Out-of-bounds Read

Affects strukturag libheifSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.5 Medium : upgrade to 1.21.0 when convenient.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.5Medium

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

EPSS: 0.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 36% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.21.0

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

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
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: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
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 29 Dec 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 strukturag/libheif to 1.21.0.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubstrukturag/libheif`pkg:github/strukturag/libheif`Other threats	Affected <1.21.0	Fixed in 1.21.0

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 immediately upgrade libheif to version 1.21.0 or later to apply the official patch that fixes the vulnerability. Where upgrading is not immediately feasible, implement strict input validation and filtering to block or quarantine HEIF images containing overlay ('iovl') boxes. Employ sandboxing or isolated environments for image processing tasks to contain potential crashes and prevent broader system impact. Update antivirus and endpoint protection solutions to detect malformed HEIF files exploiting this vulnerability. Educate users and administrators about the risks of opening untrusted HEIF images, especially those received via email or downloaded from unverified sources. Monitor application logs for crashes related to image decoding and investigate suspicious image files. For embedded or IoT devices using libheif, coordinate with vendors for firmware updates or apply mitigations to restrict image input sources. Finally, integrate this vulnerability into incident response plans to quickly address any exploitation attempts.

Description

libheif is an HEIF and AVIF file format decoder and encoder. Prior to version 1.21.0, a crafted HEIF that exercises the overlay image item path triggers a heap buffer over-read in `HeifPixelImage::overlay()`. The function computes a negative row length (likely from an unclipped overlay rectangle or invalid offsets), which then underflows when converted to `size_t` and is passed to `memcpy`, causing a very large read past the end of the source plane and a crash. Version 1.21.0 contains a patch. As a workaround, avoid decoding images using `iovl` overlay boxes.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact of CVE-2025-68431 is the risk of denial of service in applications or services that utilize libheif for image decoding. This includes media processing platforms, content management systems, digital asset management solutions, and any software handling HEIF or AVIF images. A successful exploit could cause application crashes, service interruptions, or system instability, potentially disrupting business operations or user experience. While no direct data breach or code execution is indicated, denial of service can affect availability of critical services, especially in sectors relying heavily on multimedia content such as media companies, digital marketing agencies, and software vendors. Additionally, embedded systems or IoT devices using libheif for image processing could be impacted, leading to device malfunctions. The requirement for user interaction limits remote exploitation but does not eliminate risk, as malicious images could be delivered via email, websites, or file sharing. Organizations processing large volumes of user-generated content or third-party images are particularly at risk.

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).
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 Dec 2025, 23:14 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-125, CWE-190

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats