CVE-2025-7546
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 vulnerability, which was classified as problematic, has been found in GNU Binutils 2.45. Affected by this issue is the function bfd_elf_set_group_contents of the file bfd/elf.c. The manipulation leads to out-of-bounds write. It is possible to launch the attack on the local host. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The name of the patch is 41461010eb7c79fee7a9d5f6209accdaac66cc6b. It is recommended to apply a patch to fix this issue.
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 analysis · high confidenceAn out-of-bounds write vulnerability exists in GNU Binutils 2.45 in the bfd_elf_set_group_contents function within bfd/elf.c. This flaw in ELF group content handling could allow a local attacker to write beyond allocated buffer boundaries, potentially leading to code execution or denial of service.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
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= 2.45CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Verify Binutils versionRun 'binutils --version' or 'ld --version' to confirm the installed versionAffected if Version is exactly 2.45
-
Confirm bfd library presenceCheck if the bfd library exists on the system - typically in /usr/lib or /lib directories, or check for libbfd.so filesAffected if The bfd library version matches the affected Binutils 2.45 installation
-
Check for ELF processing activityReview any automated tools, build scripts, or analysis pipelines that process ELF binaries using Binutils componentsAffected if The system uses Binutils to process untrusted ELF files via bfd/elf.c group handling routines
A system is affected if it has Binutils version 2.45 installed and uses it to process ELF files through the bfd library's elf.c component.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
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 · scopedApply the referenced patch (41461010eb7c79fee7a9d5f6209accdaac66cc6b) to add proper bounds checking in bfd_elf_set_group_contents, or upgrade to a patched Binutils version.
Check for Binutils 2.45.1 or later release which may include this fix; otherwise continue using patched 2.45
- Obtain the patch from the Binutils Git repository: commit 41461010eb7c79fee7a9d5f6209accdaac66cc6b
- Review the patch to understand the changes made to bfd/elf.c in the bfd_elf_set_group_contents function
- Apply the patch to your local Binutils 2.45 source code
- Rebuild Binutils from the patched source code
- Replace the vulnerable Binutils binaries with the newly built versions
- Verify the fix by checking that the bfd_elf_set_group_contents function no longer has the out-of-bounds write vulnerability
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-7546 — 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-2025-7546 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