CyberSecBulletin
CVE-2025-62496NVD status: Analyzed

QuickJS: Integer Overflow or Wraparound

Published Updated By the CyberSecBulletin desk

CVE-2025-62496 is a high-severity integer overflow or wraparound 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 0.49% 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 4.07.1HighCNA (google.com)
CVSS 3.18.8HighNVD

Official description

A vulnerability exists in the QuickJS engine's BigInt string parsing logic (js_bigint_from_string) when attempting to create a BigInt from a string with an excessively large number of digits. The function calculates the necessary number of bits (n_bits) required to store the BigInt using the formula: $$\text{n\_bits} = (\text{n\_digits} \times 27 + 7) / 8 \quad (\text{for radix 10})$$ * For large input strings (e.g., $79,536,432$ digits or more for base 10), the intermediate calculation $(\text{n\_digits} \times 27 + 7)$ exceeds the maximum value of a standard signed 32-bit integer, resulting in an Integer Overflow. * The resulting n_bits value becomes unexpectedly small or even negative due to this wrap-around. * This flawed n_bits is then used to compute n_limbs, the number of memory "limbs" needed for the BigInt object. Since n_bits is too small, the calculated n_limbs is also significantly underestimated. * The function proceeds to allocate a JSBigInt object using this underestimated n_limbs. * When the function later attempts to write the actual BigInt data into the allocated object, the small buffer size is quickly exceeded, leading to a Heap Out-of-Bounds Write as data is written past the end of the allocated r->tab array.

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

The underlying weakness: Integer Overflow or Wraparound

The product performs a calculation that can produce an integer overflow or wraparound when the logic assumes that the resulting value will always be larger than the original value. This occurs when an integer value is incremented to a value that is too large to store in the associated representation. When this occurs, the value may become a very small or negative number.

How developers prevent this class of flaw

  • Ensure that all protocols are strictly defined, such that all out-of-bounds behavior can be identified simply, and require strict conformance to the protocol.
  • Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. If possible, choose a language or compiler that performs automatic bounds checking.
  • Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. Use libraries or frameworks that make it easier to handle numbers without unexpected consequences. Examples include safe integer handling packages such as SafeInt (C++) or IntegerLib (C or C++).

More Integer Overflow or Wraparound vulnerabilities (CWE-190)

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 Integer Overflow or Wraparound vulnerabilities

Spotted an error? Tell us.