Client memory corruption via wrapped pixel bounds check
Published Apr 22, 2024 · Updated Nov 3, 2025
Out-of-bounds write in FreeRDP clients before 2.11.6 and 3.0.0 through 3.4.0 allows remote attackers to corrupt client memory. In clear_decompress_residual_data, a 32-bit pixelIndex plus runLengthFactor bounds check can wrap, so the following loop writes past dstBuffer. The gate is a client connection to an attacker-controlled RDP server with GFX enabled, and the consequence is an out-of-bounds client-memory write.
Summary
What happened
Out-of-bounds write in FreeRDP clients before 2.11.6 and 3.0.0 through 3.4.0 allows remote attackers to corrupt client memory. In clear_decompress_residual_data, a 32-bit pixelIndex plus runLengthFactor bounds check can wrap, so the following loop writes past dstBuffer. The gate is a client connection to an attacker-controlled RDP server with GFX enabled, and the consequence is an out-of-bounds client-memory write.
The record
- CVE
- CVE-2024-32039
- Published
- Apr 22, 2024
- Updated
- Nov 3, 2025
- Vendor
- FreeRDP
- Product
- FreeRDP
- Classifications
- CWE-190, CWE-787, T1203
- Attack vector
- network
- Privileges
- unauthenticated
Timeline
How it unfolded
- Apr 22, 2024CVE publishedPublication date reported by the CVE source.
- Nov 3, 2025Record updatedLatest update available in the CVE record.
Exploitability
Present is not the same as exploitable
Compare your product and version with the public record. A matching version still requires validation against your environment.
Is a vulnerable build present?
Compare these published version ranges with your installed build and any vendor patches.
- Affected versionversion=0 <2.11`.6
- Affected versionversion=< 2.11.6
- Affected versionversion=>= 3.0.0, 3.5.0
- Affected versionversion=3.0.0 <=3.5.0
What conditions does exploitation require?
What is affected?
Published CVSS scores
CVSS describes severity. EPSS estimates exploitation probability.
Attacks
What attackers are doing with it
Daily unique IPs observed by Shadowserver honeypots for known exploited vulnerabilities (KEVs). Missing observations do not establish an absence of attacks.
Weakness, pattern, technique
Public exploit references
No public exploit references are available in this record.
Labels summarize the accepted research assessment. They do not indicate a test against your environment.
Technologies
Your stack
See the directory against your own environment.
Your stack
Check the software in your environment
Book a demo to see how Hinoki identifies affected software and validates exploitability in your environment.
Book a demo