Vulnerabilities
Misconfiguration
Compliance
CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2025-14104

Out-of-bounds Read

Published: Dec 05, 2025 | Modified: Apr 19, 2026
CVSS 3.x
N/A
Source:
NVD
CVSS 2.x
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
6.1 MODERATE
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:H
Ubuntu
MEDIUM
Vulnerability-free packages from our partners
root.io logo minimus.io logo echo.ai logo
Additional information
NVDhttps://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-14104
CWEhttps://cwe.mitre.org/data/definitions/125.html

A flaw was found in util-linux. This vulnerability allows a heap buffer overread when processing 256-byte usernames, specifically within the setpwnam() function, affecting SUID (Set User ID) login-utils utilities writing to the password database.

Weakness

The product reads data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.

Affected Software

NameVendorStart VersionEnd Version
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10RedHatutil-linux-0:2.40.2-15.el10_1*
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8RedHatutil-linux-0:2.32.1-48.el8_10*
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8RedHatutil-linux-0:2.32.1-48.el8_10*
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9RedHatutil-linux-0:2.37.4-21.el9_7*
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9RedHatutil-linux-0:2.37.4-21.el9_7*
Red Hat Ceph Storage 7RedHatrhceph/rhceph-7-rhel9:1770632724*
Red Hat Ceph Storage 8RedHatrhceph/rhceph-8-rhel9:1770630907*
Red Hat Ceph Storage 9RedHatrhceph/rhceph-9-rhel9:1771816028*
Red Hat Hardened ImagesRedHatutil-linux-main-2.42-7.1.hum1*
Red Hat Insights proxy 1.5RedHatinsights-proxy/insights-proxy-container-rhel9:1770740405*
Red Hat Update Infrastructure 5RedHatrhui5/installer-rhel9:1770646925*
Red Hat Update Infrastructure 5RedHatrhui5/cds-rhel9:1773670073*
Red Hat Update Infrastructure 5RedHatrhui5/haproxy-rhel9:1773672059*
Red Hat Update Infrastructure 5RedHatrhui5/rhua-rhel9:1773670137*
Util-linuxUbuntuesm-infra/xenial*
Util-linuxUbuntuupstream*

Potential Mitigations

  • Assume all input is malicious. Use an “accept known good” input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
  • When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, “boat” may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as “red” or “blue.”
  • Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code’s environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright.
  • To reduce the likelihood of introducing an out-of-bounds read, ensure that you validate and ensure correct calculations for any length argument, buffer size calculation, or offset. Be especially careful of relying on a sentinel (i.e. special character such as NUL) in untrusted inputs.

References

Aqua Security is the largest pure-play cloud native security company, providing customers the freedom to innovate and run their businesses with minimal friction. The Aqua Cloud Native Security Platform provides prevention, detection, and response automation across the entire application lifecycle to secure the build, secure cloud infrastructure and secure running workloads wherever they are deployed.
Copyright © 2026 Aqua Security Software Ltd.   Privacy Policy | Terms of Use