Enterprise LinuxOperating system · Redhat
CVE-2026-40918
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 flaw was found in GIMP. Processing a specially crafted PVR image file with large dimensions can lead to a denial of service (DoS). This occurs due to a stack-based buffer overflow and an out-of-bounds read in the PVR image loader, causing the application to crash. Systems that process untrusted PVR image files are affected.
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 · moderate confidenceGIMP contains a stack-based buffer overflow and out-of-bounds read vulnerability in its PVR image file loader. When processing a specially crafted PVR image file with large dimensions, the loader fails to properly validate size parameters before writing to a stack-allocated buffer, causing the application to crash.
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
Enterprise LinuxOperating system
= 6.0= 7.0= 8.0= 9.0all versionsCVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/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 GIMP installationCheck if GIMP is installed by running 'gimp --version' or looking for the binary at /usr/bin/gimp (Linux) or C:\Program Files\GIMP (Windows)Affected if GIMP is installed on the system
-
Confirm PVR file loader is presentLocate the PVR plug-in: on Linux typically at ~/.gimp-*/plug-ins/ or /usr/lib/gimp/*/plug-ins/, search for files named 'file-pvr' or containing 'pvr' in the plugin directoryAffected if The PVR file loader plug-in exists in GIMP's plugin directories
-
Check for recent PVR file accessReview GIMP's recent files (recently.xcf or ~/.gimp-*/recently-used.xbel), check file modification logs, or examine any PVR files in user-accessible directoriesAffected if A PVR image file has been opened in GIMP recently or PVR files exist on the system that could be opened
-
Look for GIMP crash indicatorsSearch system logs (/var/log/syslog, journalctl -u gimp, or Windows Event Viewer Application logs) for crashes related to GIMP, particularly involving PVR image processingAffected if GIMP has crashed while processing a PVR file or exhibits unstable behavior when PVR files are involved
A user is affected if GIMP is installed with the PVR loader present and a PVR image file with large dimensions has been or can be opened in the application, potentially causing a crash.
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.
From vendor dataDo not open untrusted PVR image files in GIMP. Wait for the official GIMP security patch to address this vulnerability.
Fix this in Enterprise Linux
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,040.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-40918 — 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-2026-40918 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