CVE-2025-47277VulnerabilityPublished 15 Sep 2025Updated 6 Sep 2026

Red Hat Security Advisory: Red Hat Enterprise Linux AI 1.5 (NVIDIA)

Affects Red HatSource GCVE Database

Mentioned vulnerabilities

CVE-2025-48379

Not known to be exploited : upgrade to 1.6 soon.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

Severity

High

Rated by Threat Radar · No CVSS score from NVD or the CNA

EPSS: 0.9% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 61% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 1.6

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 15 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

Upgrade Red Hat to 1.6.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Red Hat Product Security Red Hat	Affected >=1.5 <1.6 Red Hat Red Hat Enterprise Linux AI Red Hat Enterprise Linux AI 1.5.1 amd64 registry.redhat.io/rhelai1/bootc-azure-nvidia-rhel9@sha256:0981388b134c612dde4275c1f9570d5cb684117ede06e12edbc021eb8e1529d2_amd64 Red Hat Enterprise Linux AI 1.5	Fixed in 1.6

AI-suggested

No official fixes or patches are currently available for these vulnerabilities in Red Hat Enterprise Linux AI 1.5 (NVIDIA). Red Hat has indicated that available mitigations do not meet their criteria for ease of use, applicability, or stability. Until then, restricting local access to trusted users may reduce risk.

Description

Red Hat® Enterprise Linux® AI is a foundation model platform to seamlessly develop, test, and run Granite family large language models (LLMs) for enterprise applications.

Impact

Successful exploitation of CVE-2025-48379 can lead to local arbitrary code execution with the privileges of the user running the vulnerable application or cause application crashes resulting in denial of service. The impact includes potential compromise of application integrity and availability. CVE-2025-47277 is also considered high severity but specific impact details are not provided. There are no known exploits in the wild at this time.

Summary

This advisory covers two vulnerabilities affecting Red Hat Enterprise Linux AI 1.5 (NVIDIA). CVE-2025-48379 is a heap-based buffer overflow in the Pillow library caused by insufficient size checking when writing DDS image data larger than 64k, potentially leading to local arbitrary code execution or denial of service. CVE-2025-47277 details are limited but it is grouped with CVE-2025-48379 in this advisory. No official patches or fixes have been released for Red Hat Enterprise Linux AI 1.5. The vulnerabilities require local access and low privileges to exploit. Red Hat rates the severity as high and currently does not provide mitigations meeting their criteria for ease of deployment and stability.

CWE-502Deserialization of Untrusted Data (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: MediumCWE Top 25 (2025): #15OWASP Top 10 A08:2025: Software or Data Integrity Failures (opens in a new tab)
The product deserializes untrusted data without sufficiently ensuring that the resulting data will be valid.
Architecture and Design · Implementation
If available, use the signing/sealing features of the programming language to assure that deserialized data has not been tainted. For example, a hash-based message authentication code (HMAC) could be used to ensure that data has not been modified.
Implementation
When deserializing data, populate a new object rather than just deserializing. The result is that the data flows through safe input validation and that the functions are safe.
Implementation
Explicitly define a final object() to prevent deserialization.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
Deserialization (opens in a new tab)
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
XML External Entity Prevention (opens in a new tab)
Software Supply Chain Security (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.5.2 (opens in a new tab)
V5.5.3 (opens in a new tab)
V5.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Object Injection (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-122Heap-based Buffer Overflow (opens in a new tab)
Variant weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #16
A heap overflow condition is a buffer overflow, where the buffer that can be overwritten is allocated in the heap portion of memory, generally meaning that the buffer was allocated using a routine such as malloc().
Pre-design: Use a language or compiler that performs automatic bounds checking.
Architecture and Design
Use an abstraction library to abstract away risky APIs. Not a complete solution.
Operation · Build and Compilation · Environment Hardening
Use automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index…
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
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 16 Aug 2026, 18:14 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-502, CWE-122

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats