CVE-2025-62494
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 · uneditedA type confusion vulnerability exists in the handling of the string addition (+) operation within the QuickJS engine. * The code first checks if the left-hand operand is a string. * It then attempts to convert the right-hand operand to a primitive value using JS_ToPrimitiveFree. This conversion can trigger a callback (e.g., toString or valueOf). * During this callback, an attacker can modify the type of the left-hand operand in memory, changing it from a string to a different type (e.g., an object or an array). * The code then proceeds to call JS_ConcatStringInPlace, which still treats the modified left-hand value as a string. This mismatch between the assumed type (string) and the actual type allows an attacker to control the data structure being processed by the concatenation logic, resulting in a type confusion condition. This can lead to out-of-bounds memory access, potentially resulting in memory corruption and arbitrary code execution in the context of the QuickJS runtime.
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 analysisA detailed technical summary for this CVE is being prepared.
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< 2025-09-13CVSS 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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 · scoped2025-09-13
QuickJS version 2025-09-13 or later
- 1. Identify the current QuickJS version in use by checking your project dependencies or the QuickJS binary version.
- 2. Navigate to the official QuickJS repository or download page at bellard.org/quickjs/ to obtain the latest stable release.
- 3. Download the QuickJS version dated 2025-09-13 or later, as this version contains the fix for the type confusion vulnerability in string concatenation.
- 4. Replace the existing QuickJS binary or library files with the updated version.
- 5. Rebuild and redeploy any applications or services that embed QuickJS to ensure they use the patched version.
- 6. Test the deployment to confirm the string concatenation (+) operation functions correctly with the updated engine.
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-2025-62494 — 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-2025-62494 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