Qt: Improper Control of Generation of Code
CVE-2025-14576 is a high-severity improper control of generation of code vulnerability in Qt, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 7.8 out of 10. It can be exploited with local access to the system by an unauthenticated attacker, but only if a user takes part, for example by opening a link or file. Affected Qt versions: 6.8.0 through 6.8.6; 6.10.0 through 6.10.1. The record does not name a fixed version, so check the vendor advisory. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.22% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.
High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.
What to do
- Update Qtdeclarative to 6.8.6 or 6.10.1, whichever matches your release line, or a later version.
- Because the attack needs a user to take part, warn users about unexpected links and files related to this product until it is patched.
Affected products and versions
| Vendor | Product | Affected versions | Fixed in |
|---|---|---|---|
| Qt | Qt | 6.8.0 through 6.8.6; 6.10.0 through 6.10.1 | Not stated |
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10 | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10.0 Extended Update Support | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
| Red Hat | Red Hat Hardened Images | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
| Red Hat | Multicluster Global Hub | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
| Red Hat | Red Hat Advanced Cluster Management for Kubernetes 2 | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
| Red Hat | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9 | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
| Red Hat | Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform 4 | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
| Red Hat | Red Hat OpenShift GitOps | Not specified in the record | Not stated |
| Qt | Qtdeclarative | 6.8.0 up to, but not including, 6.8.6; 6.10.0 up to, but not including, 6.10.1 | 6.8.6, 6.10.1 |
Version data comes from the organisation that assigned the CVE. Confirm against the vendor advisory before deciding you are unaffected.
How the severity score breaks down
- Attack vector
- LocalThe attacker needs local access or must trick a user into running something.
- Attack complexity
- LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
- Privileges required
- NoneNo account or login is needed.
- User interaction
- RequiredA user must take an action such as opening a file or link.
- Scope
- UnchangedImpact stays within the vulnerable component.
- Confidentiality
- HighAll data handled by the component can be read.
- Integrity
- HighData or code can be modified at will.
- Availability
- HighThe component can be taken down completely.
Vector: CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H. Scored by NVD.
| Scoring system | Score | Severity | Scored by |
|---|---|---|---|
| CVSS 4.0 | 7.4 | High | CNA |
| CVSS 3.1 | 7.8 | High | NVD |
| CVSS 3.1 | 7.8 | High | CNA |
Official description
Insufficient validation of node IDs in Qt SVG module allows arbitrary QML/JavaScript code injection when loading malicious SVG files through the VectorImage component in Qt Quick. While QML execution is typically more restricted than native code execution, this could still lead to denial of service, information disclosure, or other impacts depending on the application's privilege level and data access.
Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.
The underlying weakness: Improper Control of Generation of Code
The product constructs all or part of a code segment using externally-influenced input from an upstream component, but it does not neutralize or incorrectly neutralizes special elements that could modify the syntax or behavior of the intended code segment.
How developers prevent this class of flaw
- Refactor your program so that you do not have to dynamically generate code.
- Run your code in a jail or similar sandbox environment that enforces strict boundaries between the process and the operating system. This may effectively restrict which code can be executed by your product. Examples include the Unix chroot jail and AppArmor. In general, managed code may provide some protection. This may not be a feasible solution, and it only limits the impact to the operating system; the rest of your application may still be subject to compromise. Be careful to avoid CWE-243 and other weaknesses related to jails.
- Use dynamic tools and techniques that interact with the product using large test suites with many diverse inputs, such as fuzz testing (fuzzing), robustness testing, and fault injection. The product's operation may slow down, but it should not become unstable, crash, or generate incorrect results.
More Improper Control of Generation of Code vulnerabilities (CWE-94)
Timeline
- CVE record published.
- CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: no, technical impact: total).
- Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).
References
Patches and release notes
Other references
- access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:20567
- access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:24987
- access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:7620
- access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2026:7846
- access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-14576
- bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2464114
- security.access.redhat.com/data/csaf/v2/vex/2025/cve-2025-14576.json
Other vulnerabilities in Qt
- 8.7 High severity
- 7.1 High severity
- 7.1 High severity
- 8.7 High severity
- 8.7 High severity
- 9.2 Critical severity
Recent Improper Control of Generation of Code vulnerabilities
- 8.8 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
- 8.8 High severity
- 8.1 High severity
- 8.6 High severity
- 7.2 High severity
Spotted an error? Tell us.