4.3 CVE-2025-7462
A vulnerability was found in Artifex GhostPDL up to 3989415a5b8e99b9d1b87cc9902bde9b7cdea145. It has been classified as problematic. This affects the function pdf_ferror of the file devices/vector/gdevpdf.c of the component New Output File Open Error Handler. The manipulation leads to null pointer dereference. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The identifier of the patch is 619a106ba4c4abed95110f84d5efcd7aee38c7cb. It is recommended to apply a patch to fix this issue.
https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-7462
Categories
CWE-404 : Improper Resource Shutdown or Release
When a resource is created or allocated, the developer is responsible for properly releasing the resource as well as accounting for all potential paths of expiration or invalidation, such as a set period of time or revocation.
References
CPE
REMEDIATION
EXPLOITS
Exploit-db.com
| id |
description |
date |
|
| No known exploits |
POC Github
Other Nist (github, ...)
CAPEC
Common Attack Pattern Enumerations and Classifications
| id |
description |
severity |
| 125 |
Flooding
An adversary consumes the resources of a target by rapidly engaging in a large number of interactions with the target. This type of attack generally exposes a weakness in rate limiting or flow. When successful this attack prevents legitimate users from accessing the service and can cause the target to crash. This attack differs from resource depletion through leaks or allocations in that the latter attacks do not rely on the volume of requests made to the target but instead focus on manipulation of the target's operations. The key factor in a flooding attack is the number of requests the adversary can make in a given period of time. The greater this number, the more likely an attack is to succeed against a given target. |
Medium |
| 130 |
Excessive Allocation
An adversary causes the target to allocate excessive resources to servicing the attackers' request, thereby reducing the resources available for legitimate services and degrading or denying services. Usually, this attack focuses on memory allocation, but any finite resource on the target could be the attacked, including bandwidth, processing cycles, or other resources. This attack does not attempt to force this allocation through a large number of requests (that would be Resource Depletion through Flooding) but instead uses one or a small number of requests that are carefully formatted to force the target to allocate excessive resources to service this request(s). Often this attack takes advantage of a bug in the target to cause the target to allocate resources vastly beyond what would be needed for a normal request. |
Medium |
| 131 |
Resource Leak Exposure
An adversary utilizes a resource leak on the target to deplete the quantity of the resource available to service legitimate requests. |
Medium |
| 494 |
TCP Fragmentation
An adversary may execute a TCP Fragmentation attack against a target with the intention of avoiding filtering rules of network controls, by attempting to fragment the TCP packet such that the headers flag field is pushed into the second fragment which typically is not filtered. |
|
| 495 |
UDP Fragmentation
An attacker may execute a UDP Fragmentation attack against a target server in an attempt to consume resources such as bandwidth and CPU. IP fragmentation occurs when an IP datagram is larger than the MTU of the route the datagram has to traverse. Typically the attacker will use large UDP packets over 1500 bytes of data which forces fragmentation as ethernet MTU is 1500 bytes. This attack is a variation on a typical UDP flood but it enables more network bandwidth to be consumed with fewer packets. Additionally it has the potential to consume server CPU resources and fill memory buffers associated with the processing and reassembling of fragmented packets. |
|
| 496 |
ICMP Fragmentation
An attacker may execute a ICMP Fragmentation attack against a target with the intention of consuming resources or causing a crash. The attacker crafts a large number of identical fragmented IP packets containing a portion of a fragmented ICMP message. The attacker these sends these messages to a target host which causes the host to become non-responsive. Another vector may be sending a fragmented ICMP message to a target host with incorrect sizes in the header which causes the host to hang. |
|
| 666 |
BlueSmacking
An adversary uses Bluetooth flooding to transfer large packets to Bluetooth enabled devices over the L2CAP protocol with the goal of creating a DoS. This attack must be carried out within close proximity to a Bluetooth enabled device. [Scan for Bluetooth Enabled Devices] Using BlueZ along with an antenna, an adversary searches for devices with Bluetooth on. [Change L2CAP Packet Length] The adversary must change the L2CAP packet length to create packets that will overwhelm a Bluetooth enabled device. [Flood] An adversary sends the packets to the target device, and floods it until performance is degraded. |
Medium |
MITRE
Techniques
| id |
description |
| T1498.001 |
Network Denial of Service: Direct Network Flood |
| T1499 |
Endpoint Denial of Service |
| T1499.001 |
Endpoint Denial of Service: OS Exhaustion Flood |
| T1499.003 |
Endpoint Denial of Service:Application Exhaustion Flood |
| © 2022 The MITRE Corporation. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of The MITRE Corporation. |
Mitigations
| id |
description |
| M1037 |
When flood volumes exceed the capacity of the network connection being targeted, it is typically necessary to intercept the incoming traffic upstream to filter out the attack traffic from the legitimate traffic. Such defenses can be provided by the hosting Internet Service Provider (ISP) or by a 3rd party such as a Content Delivery Network (CDN) or providers specializing in DoS mitigations.
Depending on flood volume, on-premises filtering may be possible by blocking source addresses sourcing the attack, blocking ports that are being targeted, or blocking protocols being used for transport.
As immediate response may require rapid engagement of 3rd parties, analyze the risk associated to critical resources being affected by Network DoS attacks and create a disaster recovery plan/business continuity plan to respond to incidents. |
| M1037 |
Leverage services provided by Content Delivery Networks (CDN) or providers specializing in DoS mitigations to filter traffic upstream from services. Filter boundary traffic by blocking source addresses sourcing the attack, blocking ports that are being targeted, or blocking protocols being used for transport. To defend against SYN floods, enable SYN Cookies. |
| M1037 |
Leverage services provided by Content Delivery Networks (CDN) or providers specializing in DoS mitigations to filter traffic upstream from services. Filter boundary traffic by blocking source addresses sourcing the attack, blocking ports that are being targeted, or blocking protocols being used for transport. To defend against SYN floods, enable SYN Cookies. |
| M1037 |
Leverage services provided by Content Delivery Networks (CDN) or providers specializing in DoS mitigations to filter traffic upstream from services. Filter boundary traffic by blocking source addresses sourcing the attack, blocking ports that are being targeted, or blocking protocols being used for transport. |
| © 2022 The MITRE Corporation. Esta obra se reproduce y distribuye con el permiso de The MITRE Corporation. |
Cybersecurity needs ?
Strengthen software security from the outset with our DevSecOps expertise
Integrate security right from the start of the software development cycle for more robust applications and greater customer confidence.
Our team of DevSecOps experts can help you secure your APIs, data pipelines, CI/CD chains, Docker containers and Kubernetes deployments.
Discover this offer
