FKIE_CVE-2026-39886
Vulnerability from fkie_nvd - Published: 2026-04-21 02:16 - Updated: 2026-04-22 18:41
Severity ?
Summary
OpenEXR provides the specification and reference implementation of the EXR file format, an image storage format for the motion picture industry. Versions 3.4.0 through 3.4.9 have a signed integer overflow vulnerability in OpenEXR's HTJ2K (High-Throughput JPEG 2000) decompression path. The `ht_undo_impl()` function in `src/lib/OpenEXRCore/internal_ht.cpp` accumulates a bytes-per-line value (`bpl`) using a 32-bit signed integer with no overflow guard. A crafted EXR file with 16,385 FLOAT channels at the HTJ2K maximum width of 32,767 causes `bpl` to overflow `INT_MAX`, producing undefined behavior confirmed by UBSan. On an
allocator-permissive host where the required ~64 GB allocation succeeds, the wrapped negative `bpl` value would subsequently be used as a per-scanline pointer advance, which would produce a heap out-of-bounds write. On a memory-constrained host, the allocation fails before `ht_undo_impl()` is entered. This is the second distinct integer overflow in `ht_undo_impl()`. CVE-2026-34545 addressed a different overflow in the same function — the `int16_t p` pixel-loop counter at line ~302 that overflows when iterating over channels whose `width` exceeds 32,767. The CVE-2026-34545 fix did not touch the `int bpl` accumulator at line 211, which is the subject of this advisory. The `bpl` accumulator was also not addressed by any of the 8 advisories in the 2026-04-05 v3.4.9 release batch. This finding is structurally identical to CVE-2026-34588 (PIZ `wcount*nx` overflow in `internal_piz.c`) and should be remediated with the same pattern. The CVE-2026-34588 fix did not touch `internal_ht.cpp`. Version 3.4.10 contains a remediation that addresses the vulnerability in `internal_ht.cpp`.
References
| URL | Tags | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| security-advisories@github.com | https://github.com/AcademySoftwareFoundation/openexr/releases/tag/v3.4.10 | Product, Release Notes | |
| security-advisories@github.com | https://github.com/AcademySoftwareFoundation/openexr/security/advisories/GHSA-r3mr-mx8q-jcw5 | Exploit, Mitigation, Vendor Advisory |
{
"configurations": [
{
"nodes": [
{
"cpeMatch": [
{
"criteria": "cpe:2.3:a:openexr:openexr:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*",
"matchCriteriaId": "7AEDBB28-BFC6-427E-977B-A26211BC5724",
"versionEndExcluding": "3.4.10",
"versionStartIncluding": "3.4.0",
"vulnerable": true
}
],
"negate": false,
"operator": "OR"
}
]
}
],
"cveTags": [],
"descriptions": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "OpenEXR provides the specification and reference implementation of the EXR file format, an image storage format for the motion picture industry. Versions 3.4.0 through 3.4.9 have a signed integer overflow vulnerability in OpenEXR\u0027s HTJ2K (High-Throughput JPEG 2000) decompression path. The `ht_undo_impl()` function in `src/lib/OpenEXRCore/internal_ht.cpp` accumulates a bytes-per-line value (`bpl`) using a 32-bit signed integer with no overflow guard. A crafted EXR file with 16,385 FLOAT channels at the HTJ2K maximum width of 32,767 causes `bpl` to overflow `INT_MAX`, producing undefined behavior confirmed by UBSan. On an\nallocator-permissive host where the required ~64 GB allocation succeeds, the wrapped negative `bpl` value would subsequently be used as a per-scanline pointer advance, which would produce a heap out-of-bounds write. On a memory-constrained host, the allocation fails before `ht_undo_impl()` is entered. This is the second distinct integer overflow in `ht_undo_impl()`. CVE-2026-34545 addressed a different overflow in the same function \u2014 the `int16_t p` pixel-loop counter at line ~302 that overflows when iterating over channels whose `width` exceeds 32,767. The CVE-2026-34545 fix did not touch the `int bpl` accumulator at line 211, which is the subject of this advisory. The `bpl` accumulator was also not addressed by any of the 8 advisories in the 2026-04-05 v3.4.9 release batch. This finding is structurally identical to CVE-2026-34588 (PIZ `wcount*nx` overflow in `internal_piz.c`) and should be remediated with the same pattern. The CVE-2026-34588 fix did not touch `internal_ht.cpp`. Version 3.4.10 contains a remediation that addresses the vulnerability in `internal_ht.cpp`."
}
],
"id": "CVE-2026-39886",
"lastModified": "2026-04-22T18:41:18.187",
"metrics": {
"cvssMetricV31": [
{
"cvssData": {
"attackComplexity": "LOW",
"attackVector": "NETWORK",
"availabilityImpact": "LOW",
"baseScore": 5.3,
"baseSeverity": "MEDIUM",
"confidentialityImpact": "NONE",
"integrityImpact": "NONE",
"privilegesRequired": "NONE",
"scope": "UNCHANGED",
"userInteraction": "NONE",
"vectorString": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L",
"version": "3.1"
},
"exploitabilityScore": 3.9,
"impactScore": 1.4,
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"type": "Secondary"
}
]
},
"published": "2026-04-21T02:16:07.753",
"references": [
{
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"tags": [
"Product",
"Release Notes"
],
"url": "https://github.com/AcademySoftwareFoundation/openexr/releases/tag/v3.4.10"
},
{
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"tags": [
"Exploit",
"Mitigation",
"Vendor Advisory"
],
"url": "https://github.com/AcademySoftwareFoundation/openexr/security/advisories/GHSA-r3mr-mx8q-jcw5"
}
],
"sourceIdentifier": "security-advisories@github.com",
"vulnStatus": "Analyzed",
"weaknesses": [
{
"description": [
{
"lang": "en",
"value": "CWE-190"
}
],
"source": "security-advisories@github.com",
"type": "Primary"
}
]
}
Loading…
Loading…
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Loading…
Loading…