CVE Vulnerabilities

CVE-2026-45696

Heap-based Buffer Overflow

Published: Jun 18, 2026 | Modified: Jun 30, 2026
CVSS 3.x
6.5
MEDIUM
Source:
NVD
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CVSS 2.x
RedHat/V2
RedHat/V3
7.1 IMPORTANT
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:H
Ubuntu
MEDIUM
root.io logo minimus.io logo echo.ai logo

OpenEXR is the reference implementation and specification for the EXR image format, widely used in the motion picture industry. In versions 3.4.0 through 3.4.11, the HTJ2K (High-Throughput JPEG 2000) decoder, ht_undo_impl() in OpenEXRCore is vulnerable to a heap-buffer-overflow READ. The ht_undo_imp function copies decoded pixels out of a per-line OpenJPH buffer using the EXR channels declared width as the iteration count. The codestream embedded in the EXR chunk can declare different (smaller) tile/line dimensions than the EXR header advertises, but ht_undo_impl() does not validate this — it pulls width 32-bit samples from cur_line->i32[] without checking the OpenJPH line buffers actual length. A crafted EXR file produces a 4-byte heap-buffer-overflow READ immediately after a buffer allocated by ojph::local::codestream::finalize_alloc(). The bug is reachable through the standard scanline-decode entry point used by every consumer of exr_decoding_run/Imf::checkOpenEXRFile, including thumbnailers, asset pipelines, and the exrcheck utility — i.e. any application that opens untrusted EXR files. The result is a deterministic crash (DoS) and potential adjacent-heap leak. This issue has been fixed in version 3.4.12.

Weakness

A heap overflow condition is a buffer overflow, where the buffer that can be overwritten is allocated in the heap portion of memory, generally meaning that the buffer was allocated using a routine such as malloc().

Affected Software

NameVendorStart VersionEnd Version
OpenexrOpenexr3.4.0 (including)3.4.12 (excluding)

Potential Mitigations

  • 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.
  • 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].

References