CVE-2025-62171
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedImageMagick is an open source software suite for displaying, converting, and editing raster image files. In ImageMagick versions prior to 7.1.2-7 and 6.9.13-32, an integer overflow vulnerability exists in the BMP decoder on 32-bit systems. The vulnerability occurs in coders/bmp.c when calculating the extent value by multiplying image columns by bits per pixel. On 32-bit systems with size_t of 4 bytes, a malicious BMP file with specific dimensions can cause this multiplication to overflow and wrap to zero. The overflow check added to address CVE-2025-57803 is placed after the overflow occurs, making it ineffective. A specially crafted 58-byte BMP file with width set to 536,870,912 and 32 bits per pixel can trigger this overflow, causing the bytes_per_line calculation to become zero. This vulnerability only affects 32-bit builds of ImageMagick where default resource limits for width, height, and area have been manually increased beyond their defaults. 64-bit systems with size_t of 8 bytes are not vulnerable, and systems using default ImageMagick resource limits are not vulnerable. The vulnerability is fixed in versions 7.1.2-7 and 6.9.13-32.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysisAn arithmetic operation produces a value too large for its type and wraps around to an unexpected — often tiny or negative — number. That miscalculated value then drives a memory allocation or a bounds check, opening the door to corruption. The fix is checked arithmetic and validating sizes before they're used.
General guidance for the integer overflow class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data< 6.9.13-32>= 7.0.0-0, < 7.1.2-7CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scoped6.9.13-327.1.2-7
ImageMagick 6.9.13-32 (for 6.x line) or ImageMagick 7.1.2-7 (for 7.x line)
- 1. Determine the current ImageMagick version by running `convert -version` (for ImageMagick 6) or `magick -version` (for ImageMagick 7)
- 2. If running ImageMagick 6.x version below 6.9.13-32, upgrade to version 6.9.13-32 or later
- 3. If running ImageMagick 7.x version below 7.1.2-7, upgrade to version 7.1.2-7 or later
- 4. On affected 32-bit systems, verify the upgrade by running the version command again
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-62171 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-62171 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data