CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2025-14174

Out-of-bounds Write

Published: Dec 12, 2025 | Modified: Dec 15, 2025
CVSS 3.x
N/A
Source:
NVD
CVSS 2.x
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
8.8 IMPORTANT
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Ubuntu
HIGH
root.io logo minimus.io logo echo.ai logo

Out of bounds memory access in ANGLE in Google Chrome on Mac prior to 143.0.7499.110 allowed a remote attacker to perform out of bounds memory access via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: High)

Weakness

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

Affected Software

NameVendorStart VersionEnd Version
ChromeGoogle143.0.7499.41 (including)143.0.7499.110 (excluding)
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8RedHatwebkit2gtk3-0:2.50.4-1.el8_10*
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.2 Advanced Update SupportRedHatwebkit2gtk3-0:2.50.4-1.el8_2*
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.4 Advanced Mission Critical Update SupportRedHatwebkit2gtk3-0:2.50.4-1.el8_4*
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.4 Extended Update Support Long-Life Add-OnRedHatwebkit2gtk3-0:2.50.4-1.el8_4*
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.6 Advanced Mission Critical Update SupportRedHatwebkit2gtk3-0:2.50.4-1.el8_6*
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.6 Telecommunications Update ServiceRedHatwebkit2gtk3-0:2.50.4-1.el8_6*
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.6 Update Services for SAP SolutionsRedHatwebkit2gtk3-0:2.50.4-1.el8_6*
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.8 Telecommunications Update ServiceRedHatwebkit2gtk3-0:2.50.4-1.el8_8*
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.8 Update Services for SAP SolutionsRedHatwebkit2gtk3-0:2.50.4-1.el8_8*
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9RedHatwebkit2gtk3-0:2.50.4-1.el9_7*
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9.0 Update Services for SAP SolutionsRedHatwebkit2gtk3-0:2.50.4-1.el9_0*
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9.2 Update Services for SAP SolutionsRedHatwebkit2gtk3-0:2.50.4-1.el9_2*
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9.4 Extended Update SupportRedHatwebkit2gtk3-0:2.50.4-1.el9_4*
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9.6 Extended Update SupportRedHatwebkit2gtk3-0:2.50.4-1.el9_6*
Chromium-browserUbuntuupstream*
Qtwebkit-opensource-srcUbuntuesm-apps/bionic*
Qtwebkit-opensource-srcUbuntuesm-apps/focal*
Qtwebkit-opensource-srcUbuntuesm-apps/jammy*
Qtwebkit-opensource-srcUbuntuesm-apps/noble*
Qtwebkit-opensource-srcUbuntuesm-infra/xenial*
Qtwebkit-opensource-srcUbuntujammy*
Qtwebkit-opensource-srcUbuntunoble*
Qtwebkit-sourceUbuntuesm-apps/bionic*
Qtwebkit-sourceUbuntuesm-apps/xenial*
Webkit2gtkUbuntudevel*
Webkit2gtkUbuntuesm-infra/bionic*
Webkit2gtkUbuntuesm-infra/focal*
Webkit2gtkUbuntuesm-infra/xenial*
Webkit2gtkUbuntujammy*
Webkit2gtkUbuntunoble*
Webkit2gtkUbuntuplucky*
Webkit2gtkUbuntuquesting*
Webkit2gtkUbuntuupstream*
WebkitgtkUbuntuesm-apps/bionic*
WebkitgtkUbuntuesm-apps/xenial*
WpewebkitUbuntuesm-apps/focal*
WpewebkitUbuntuesm-apps/jammy*
WpewebkitUbuntujammy*
WpewebkitUbuntuupstream*

Potential Mitigations

  • Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.

  • For example, many languages that perform their own memory management, such as Java and Perl, are not subject to buffer overflows. Other languages, such as Ada and C#, typically provide overflow protection, but the protection can be disabled by the programmer.

  • Be wary that a language’s interface to native code may still be subject to overflows, even if the language itself is theoretically safe.

  • Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.

  • Examples include the Safe C String Library (SafeStr) by Messier and Viega [REF-57], and the Strsafe.h library from Microsoft [REF-56]. These libraries provide safer versions of overflow-prone string-handling functions.

  • Use automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index checking.

  • D3-SFCV (Stack Frame Canary Validation) from D3FEND [REF-1334] discusses canary-based detection in detail.

  • Consider adhering to the following rules when allocating and managing an application’s memory:

  • Run or compile the software using features or extensions that randomly arrange the positions of a program’s executable and libraries in memory. Because this makes the addresses unpredictable, it can prevent an attacker from reliably jumping to exploitable code.

  • Examples include Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR) [REF-58] [REF-60] and Position-Independent Executables (PIE) [REF-64]. Imported modules may be similarly realigned if their default memory addresses conflict with other modules, in a process known as “rebasing” (for Windows) and “prelinking” (for Linux) [REF-1332] using randomly generated addresses. ASLR for libraries cannot be used in conjunction with prelink since it would require relocating the libraries at run-time, defeating the whole purpose of prelinking.

  • For more information on these techniques see D3-SAOR (Segment Address Offset Randomization) from D3FEND [REF-1335].

  • Use a CPU and operating system that offers Data Execution Protection (using hardware NX or XD bits) or the equivalent techniques that simulate this feature in software, such as PaX [REF-60] [REF-61]. These techniques ensure that any instruction executed is exclusively at a memory address that is part of the code segment.

  • For more information on these techniques see D3-PSEP (Process Segment Execution Prevention) from D3FEND [REF-1336].

References