CVE-2025-6965VulnerabilityPublished 5 Jan 2026Updated 21 Oct 2026

Red Hat Security Advisory: spice-client-win security update

Affects Red HatSource GCVE Database

Mentioned vulnerabilities

Not known to be exploited · public exploit available (Exploit-DB) · 73% EPSS.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

Exploit forecast

Likely to be exploited

73.4% EPSS · High severity · No CVSS score from NVD or the CNA

EPSS: 73.4% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 99% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

Exploitation evidence

t = 0 is the CVE’s publication on cve.org

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 5 Jan 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: evidence found.
1 Exploit-DB entry, 93 days after disclosure
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

CVE published
on cve.org
2026-01-0518:01Z, t = 0
First Exploit-DB entry (opens in a new tab)
SQLite 3.50.1 - Heap Overflow
2026-04-08, 93 days after disclosure

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
Red Hat Product Security Red Hat	Affected >=8.6 <=8.6 Red Hat Red Hat Enterprise Linux Red Hat Enterprise Linux AppStream AUS (v.8.6) Red Hat Enterprise Linux AppStream E4S (v.8.6) Red Hat Enterprise Linux AppStream TUS (v.8.6)	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

Red Hat has released updated spice-client-win packages for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.6 variants that address these vulnerabilities. Users should apply the security update as described in the Red Hat advisory RHSA-2026:0076 to remediate these issues. Refer to https://access.redhat.com/articles/11258 for update instructions. No additional mitigation steps are specified or required beyond applying the official update.

Description

Spice client MSI installers for Windows clients Security Fix(es): * sqlite: Integer Truncation in SQLite (CVE-2025-6965) * libtiff: LibTIFF Use-After-Free Vulnerability (CVE-2025-8176) * libtiff: Libtiff Write-What-Where (CVE-2025-9900) * expat: libexpat in Expat allows attackers to trigger large dynamic memory allocations via a small document that is submitted for parsing (CVE-2025-59375) For more details about the security issue(s), including the impact, a CVSS score, acknowledgments, and other related information, refer to the CVE page(s) listed in the References section.

Impact

The vulnerabilities could allow attackers to cause memory corruption or excessive memory allocation, potentially leading to denial of service or other unintended behavior in the spice-client-win component. The issues affect Windows MSI installers distributed with Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.6 variants. No known exploits in the wild have been reported at this time.

Summary

This advisory covers security fixes for spice-client-win MSI installers on Windows clients distributed with Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.6. The addressed vulnerabilities include CVE-2025-6965 (integer truncation in SQLite), CVE-2025-8176 (use-after-free in libtiff), CVE-2025-9900 (write-what-where in libtiff), and CVE-2025-59375 (large dynamic memory allocations triggered via libexpat). The advisory references updated packages for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.6 variants including Advanced Mission Critical Update Support, Update Services for SAP Solutions, and Telecommunications Update Service. No CVSS scores are provided in the advisory, but the overall security impact is rated as Important by Red Hat Product Security.

CWE-197Numeric Truncation Error (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: Low
Truncation errors occur when a primitive is cast to a primitive of a smaller size and data is lost in the conversion.
Implementation
Ensure that no casts, implicit or explicit, take place that move from a larger size primitive or a smaller size primitive.
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-825Expired Pointer Dereference (opens in a new tab)
Base weakness
The product dereferences a pointer that contains a location for memory that was previously valid, but is no longer valid.
Architecture and Design
Choose a language that provides automatic memory management.
Implementation
When freeing pointers, be sure to set them to NULL once they are freed. However, the utilization of multiple or complex data structures may lower the usefulness of this strategy.
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)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-123Write-what-where Condition (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: High
Any condition where the attacker has the ability to write an arbitrary value to an arbitrary location, often as the result of a buffer overflow.
Architecture and Design · Language Selection
Use a language that provides appropriate memory abstractions.
Operation
Use OS-level preventative functionality integrated after the fact. Not a complete solution.
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)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).
CWE-770Allocation of Resources Without Limits or Throttling (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #25
The product allocates a reusable resource or group of resources on behalf of an actor without imposing any intended restrictions on the size or number of resources that can be allocated.
Requirements
Clearly specify the minimum and maximum expectations for capabilities, and dictate which behaviors are acceptable when resource allocation reaches limits.
Architecture and Design
Limit the amount of resources that are accessible to unprivileged users. Set per-user limits for resources. Allow the system administrator to define these limits. Be careful to avoid CWE-410.
Architecture and Design
Design throttling mechanisms into the system architecture. The best protection is to limit the amount of resources that an unauthorized user can cause to be expended.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Abuse Case (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V13.4.1 (opens in a new tab)
V11.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
XML Ping of the Death (opens in a new tab)
Exponential Data Expansion (opens in a new tab)
Serialized Data Parameter Blowup (opens in a new tab)
Serialized Data with Nested Payloads (opens in a new tab)
Oversized Serialized Data Payloads (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

Timeline

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 13 Aug 2026, 20:13 UTC

Public exploits and detection1 Exploit-DB entry

WeaknessesCWE-197, CWE-825, CWE-123 +1

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats