CVE-2026-56362
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 before 7.1.2-15 contains a heap-buffer-overflow read vulnerability in GetPixelIndex caused by OpenPixelCache updating image channel metadata before pixel cache memory allocation. Attackers can trigger memory and disk allocation failures to cause a heap-buffer-overflow read affecting any writer calling GetPixelIndex.
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 confidenceImageMagick before 7.1.2-15 has a heap-buffer-overflow read vulnerability in the GetPixelIndex function. The root cause is OpenPixelCache updating image channel metadata before pixel cache memory allocation completes, leading to an out-of-bounds read when memory or disk allocation failures occur. Any writer calling GetPixelIndex can be affected by this flaw.
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< 6.9.13-40>= 7.0.0-0, < 7.1.2-15CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/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.
-
Identify ImageMagick installation versionRun `identify -version` or `convert -version` on the system to obtain the installed version number and confirm the product is ImageMagickAffected if The version output shows ImageMagick is installed and the version falls within < 6.9.13-40 or >= 7.0.0-0, < 7.1.2-15
-
Parse the version number componentsExtract the major, minor, and patch version numbers from the version string (e.g., 7.1.2-14 would show version 7.1.2, patch level 14)Affected if For version 6.x: the patch version (e.g., 13-39) is less than 40; for version 7.x: the version is less than 7.1.2-15
-
Determine if the system processes untrusted image filesReview application configuration and code that uses ImageMagick to identify if it processes images from untrusted sources (uploaded files, external input, etc.)Affected if ImageMagick is used to process user-supplied or untrusted image files without sufficient input validation or resource limits
-
Check if resource limits are enforced on ImageMagick operationsInspect ImageMagick policy.xml configuration file (typically in /etc/ImageMagick-6 or /etc/ImageMagick-7) and application-level resource limits for pixel cache, memory, and disk allocationAffected if No resource limits are configured and the system processes images that could trigger the allocation failure conditions that lead to the overflow
The system is affected if ImageMagick version is less than 6.9.13-40 (6.x series) or less than 7.1.2-15 (7.x series) AND the application processes untrusted image files without resource limits that could trigger the allocation failure conditions.
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 · scoped6.9.13-407.1.2-15
Upgrade ImageMagick to version 7.1.2-15 or later to patch the vulnerability. As this is a heap-buffer-overflow with potential for information disclosure or crash, priority should be given to systems processing untrusted image input.
ImageMagick 6.9.13-40 (6.x branch) or 7.1.2-15 (7.x branch)
- 1. Identify the currently installed ImageMagick version using 'convert --version' or 'magick --version'
- 2. If running version 6.x branch (< 6.9.13-40): upgrade to version 6.9.13-40 or later
- 3. If running version 7.x branch (>= 7.0.0-0 and < 7.1.2-15): upgrade to version 7.1.2-15 or later
- 4. Use your system's package manager to upgrade (e.g., apt-get update && apt-get install imagemagick, yum update ImageMagick, or brew upgrade imagemagick)
- 5. Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the new version with 'convert --version'
- 6. Test critical ImageMagick-dependent workflows to ensure functionality is intact
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $3,648.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-56362 — 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-2026-56362 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