CyberSecBulletin
CVE-2025-62491NVD status: Analyzed

QuickJS: Use After Free

CVE-2025-62491 is a high-severity use after free vulnerability in QuickJS, with a CVSS 3.1 base score of 8.8 out of 10. It can be exploited from the same local network by an unauthenticated attacker, without any action from a user. The record lists version 2025-09-13 as the first without the flaw, so updating QuickJS to that release or later removes the exposure. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.41% chance of exploitation within 30 days, which is low compared with other CVEs.

Next patch cycle

High severity with no evidence of exploitation so far.

What to do

  1. Update QuickJS to 2025-09-13 or a later version.

Affected products and versions

VendorProductAffected versionsFixed in
QuickJSQuickJS2025-04-26 up to, but not including, 2025-09-132025-09-13

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
AdjacentThe attacker must be on the same local network segment.
Attack complexity
LowNo special conditions are needed; the attack works reliably.
Privileges required
NoneNo account or login is needed.
User interaction
NoneNo action by a victim is required.
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:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H. Scored by NVD.

Scoring systemScoreSeverityScored by
CVSS 4.08.8HighCNA (google.com)
CVSS 3.18.8HighNVD

Official description

A Use-After-Free (UAF) vulnerability exists in the QuickJS engine's standard library when iterating over the global list of unhandled rejected promises (ts->rejected_promise_list). * The function js_std_promise_rejection_check attempts to iterate over the rejected_promise_list to report unhandled rejections using a standard list loop. * The reason for a promise rejection is processed inside the loop, including calling js_std_dump_error1(ctx, rp->reason). * If the promise rejection reason is an Error object that defines a custom property getter (e.g., via Object.defineProperty), this getter is executed during the error dumping process. * The malicious custom getter can execute JavaScript code that calls catch() on the same rejected promise being processed. * Calling catch() internally triggers js_std_promise_rejection_tracker, which then removes and frees the current promise entry (JSRejectedPromiseEntry) from the rejected_promise_list. * Since the list iteration continues using the now-freed memory pointer (el), the subsequent loop access results in a Use-After-Free condition.

Source: the CVE record as published by its numbering authority, via NVD and CVE.org.

The underlying weakness: Use After Free

The product reuses or references memory after it has been freed. At some point afterward, the memory may be allocated again and saved in another pointer, while the original pointer references a location somewhere within the new allocation. Any operations using the original pointer are no longer valid because the memory belongs to the code that operates on the new pointer.

How developers prevent this class of flaw

  • Choose a language that provides automatic memory management.
  • When freeing pointers, be sure to set them to NULL once they are freed. However, the utilization of multiple or complex data structures may lower the usefulness of this strategy.

More Use After Free vulnerabilities (CWE-416)

Timeline

  1. CVE record published.
  2. CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: poc, automatable: no, technical impact: total).
  3. Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).

References

Patches and release notes

Technical write-ups (may include proof of concept)

Other vulnerabilities in QuickJS

All QuickJS vulnerabilities

Recent Use After Free vulnerabilities

Spotted an error? Tell us.