CVE-2026-6045
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 · uneditedLibreOffice can import EMF+ graphics, which may be embedded in documents. A heap buffer overflow existed when importing an EMF+ gradient brush. The number of gradient blend points was read from the file and used to compute an allocation size, but that multiplication could overflow, so a small buffer was allocated and then filled as if it were large, writing past its end. In fixed versions the blend-point count is checked against the data actually available before allocating.
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 confidenceLibreOffice contains a heap buffer overflow vulnerability when importing EMF+ graphics files. The vulnerability stems from the gradient brush import function reading a blend-point count from the file and using it to calculate memory allocation size without proper overflow validation. An integer overflow in the multiplication allows a small buffer to be allocated while the code proceeds as if it were larger, causing out-of-bounds writes.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS 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
- Authentication
- X
- User interaction
- P
- Scope
- X
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:L/VI:L/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
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.
-
Confirm LibreOffice installationRun 'libreoffice --version' or check for LibreOffice in installed programsAffected if LibreOffice is installed and the version is unpatched (compare to any available fixed version from your vendor)
-
Verify EMF+ import capability existsCheck that the graphic import filter for EMF+ files is present in the LibreOffice installation directory (typically in program/ or share/ under filters/ or similar)Affected if The EMF+ graphics import filter is present in the installation
-
Check for recent EMF+ file activityReview recent document access logs or check the user's recent documents folder for .emf or .emf+ files that may have been opened with LibreOfficeAffected if Users have opened EMF+ graphics files using LibreOffice recently
-
Inspect memory allocation behavior (optional)If EMF+ files are being processed, monitor memory allocation patterns during import using debugging tools or LibreOffice's internal diagnostics if availableAffected if Memory allocation during EMF+ import does not properly validate blend-point counts leading to small buffers
A user is affected if they have an unpatched version of LibreOffice that processes EMF+ graphics files, as the vulnerability requires the vulnerable gradient brush import function to parse a specially crafted EMF+ file.
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 dataUpdate LibreOffice to the fixed version which validates the blend-point count against available data before performing the allocation.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $4,096.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-6045 — 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-2026-6045 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