CVE-2026-56367
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 and 6.9.x before 6.9.13-40 contains an integer overflow in the PSB (PSD v2) RLE decoding path (ReadPSDChannelRLE in coders/psd.c) that causes a heap out-of-bounds read on 32-bit builds. Processing a crafted PSB file can lead to information disclosure or a crash.
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 contains an integer overflow vulnerability in the PSB (PSD v2) RLE decoding function (ReadPSDChannelRLE in coders/psd.c). On 32-bit builds, this overflow allows a heap out-of-bounds read when processing specially crafted PSB files with malformed RLE-compressed channel data, potentially leading to information disclosure or denial of service via 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>= 6.9.0-0, < 6.9.13-40>= 7.1.2-0, < 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
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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 versionRun `magick -version` or `identify -version` to get the installed version numberAffected if Version is 6.9.0-0 through 6.9.13-39, OR 7.1.2-0 through 7.1.2-14 (before the fixed releases)
-
Confirm architecture is 32-bitRun `identify -list configure` and look for 'Architecture' or use `file $(which magick)` to check the binary typeAffected if Running a 32-bit build of ImageMagick (the heap out-of-bounds read specifically affects 32-bit)
You are affected if you run a 32-bit ImageMagick version between 6.9.0-0 and 6.9.13-39, or between 7.1.2-0 and 7.1.2-14, and your ImageMagick installation can process PSB/PSD files
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, or 6.9.13-40 or later for the 6.9.x branch. As a defensive measure, consider disabling PSB/PSD file processing in production environments until patches are applied.
ImageMagick 6.9.13-40 or later for 6.x branch; ImageMagick 7.1.2-15 or later for 7.x branch
- 1. Identify the currently installed ImageMagick version using 'convert --version' or 'magick --version'
- 2. If using ImageMagick 6.x branch (6.9.0-0 through 6.9.13-39), upgrade to version 6.9.13-40 or later
- 3. If using ImageMagick 7.x branch (7.1.2-0 through 7.1.2-14), upgrade to version 7.1.2-15 or later
- 4. Obtain the updated package from your distribution's package manager or compile from source available at github.com/ImageMagick/ImageMagick
- 5. After upgrade, verify the new version is installed with 'convert --version'
- 6. Test that PSB/PSD file processing still works correctly with the new version
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 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 $3,328.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-56367 — 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-2026-56367 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