Enterprise LinuxOperating system · Redhat
CVE-2026-40919
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. This vulnerability, a buffer overflow in the `file-seattle-filmworks` plugin, can be exploited when a user opens a specially crafted Seattle Filmworks file. A remote attacker could leverage this to cause a denial of service (DoS), leading to the plugin crashing and potentially impacting the stability of the GIMP application.
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 confidenceA buffer overflow vulnerability exists in GIMP's file-seattle-filmworks plugin when parsing specially crafted Seattle Filmworks image files. This occurs due to insufficient bounds checking when handling file data, allowing an attacker to trigger a denial of service by causing the plugin 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 is installedRun 'gimp --version' or check for GIMP in your package manager (rpm -qa | grep -i gimp on RHEL-based systems)Affected if GIMP is present on the system
-
Locate the file-seattle-filmworks pluginSearch for the plugin file: 'find /usr -name "*seattle-filmworks*" 2>/dev/null' or check GIMP plugin directory (typically /usr/lib/gimp/*/plug-ins/ or ~/.gimp-*/plug-ins/)Affected if The file-seattle-filmworks plugin file exists on the system
-
Confirm plugin is enabled/loadableCheck if the plugin has executable permissions: 'ls -la <plugin_path>' and attempt to run GIMP with verbose logging to see loaded pluginsAffected if The plugin exists and has executable permissions, making it loadable by GIMP
-
Check if you handle Seattle Filmworks filesReview your GIMP usage or search for .sfw file extensions in your workflows: 'find ~ -name "*.sfw" 2>/dev/null'Affected if You or your users open or process Seattle Filmworks (.sfw) image files in GIMP
Your environment is affected if GIMP with the file-seattle-filmworks plugin is installed AND you handle Seattle Filmworks image files, as the buffer overflow triggers during file parsing.
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 dataAvoid opening untrusted or unknown Seattle Filmworks files in GIMP until an official patch is released. Consider temporarily disabling the file-seattle-filmworks plugin if not required.
Fix this in Enterprise Linux
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,560.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-40919 — 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-2026-40919 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