Availability loss via flex coordinate overflow
Published Jan 10, 2025 · Updated Feb 12, 2025
Integer overflow in FreeType 2.8.1 allows local users to cause limited availability loss through crafted CFF glyph flex data. The cf2_doFlex routine in cff/cf2intrp.c performs signed 32-bit additions and subtractions on CFF flex coordinates without overflow-safe macros. Reachability requires a local application to process a crafted CFF glyph with the affected library; downstream security teams describe the overflow as expected and harmless, so the concrete service effect is disputed.
Summary
What happened
Integer overflow in FreeType 2.8.1 allows local users to cause limited availability loss through crafted CFF glyph flex data. The cf2_doFlex routine in cff/cf2intrp.c performs signed 32-bit additions and subtractions on CFF flex coordinates without overflow-safe macros. Reachability requires a local application to process a crafted CFF glyph with the affected library; downstream security teams describe the overflow as expected and harmless, so the concrete service effect is disputed.
The record
- CVE
- CVE-2025-23022
- Published
- Jan 10, 2025
- Updated
- Feb 12, 2025
- Vendor
- FreeType
- Product
- FreeType
- Classifications
- CWE-190
- Attack vector
- local
- Privileges
- unauthenticated
Timeline
How it unfolded
- Jan 10, 2025CVE publishedPublication date reported by the CVE source.
- Feb 12, 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=2.8.1
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