Key disclosure and integrity bypass via cryptographic failures
Published Nov 12, 2025 · Updated Nov 13, 2025
Cryptographic failures in DuckDB 1.4.0 through 1.4.1 allow attackers to recover keys or bypass integrity via crafted headers or weak randomness. The encryption implementation uses pcg32 for keys and IVs, erasable memset calls for key clearing, attacker-controlled header cipher flags, and unchecked OpenSSL rand_bytes results. Exploitation requires access to public IVs, process memory, a database header, or influence over OpenSSL randomness, depending on the failure.
Summary
What happened
Cryptographic failures in DuckDB 1.4.0 through 1.4.1 allow attackers to recover keys or bypass integrity via crafted headers or weak randomness. The encryption implementation uses pcg32 for keys and IVs, erasable memset calls for key clearing, attacker-controlled header cipher flags, and unchecked OpenSSL rand_bytes results. Exploitation requires access to public IVs, process memory, a database header, or influence over OpenSSL randomness, depending on the failure.
The record
- CVE
- CVE-2025-64429
- Published
- Nov 12, 2025
- Updated
- Nov 13, 2025
- Vendor
- DuckDB
- Product
- DuckDB
- Classifications
- CWE-327, T1565.001
- Attack vector
- network
- Privileges
- unauthenticated
Timeline
How it unfolded
- Nov 12, 2025CVE publishedPublication date reported by the CVE source.
- Nov 13, 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=>= 1.4.0, < 1.4.2
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