CyberSecBulletin
CVE-2026-103414NVD status: Awaiting Analysis

GUIX: Out-of-bounds Write

Published Updated By the CyberSecBulletin desk

CVE-2026-103414 is a high-severity out-of-bounds write vulnerability in GUIX from Eclipse Foundation, with a CVSS 4.0 base score of 8.4 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 GUIX versions: 6.5.1.202602a and earlier. The record does not name a fixed version, so check the vendor advisory. There is no confirmed exploitation so far. EPSS estimates a 0.16% 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. Check which version of GUIX you run against the affected versions below, and install the vendor's latest release.
  2. Read the advisory on github.com for workarounds and exact fixed builds.
  3. 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

VendorProductAffected versionsFixed in
Eclipse FoundationGUIX6.5.1.202602a and earlierNot stated

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.
Attack requirements
NoneThe attack does not depend on a particular deployment or configuration.
Privileges required
NoneNo account or login is needed.
User interaction
ActiveA user must deliberately do something unusual, such as dismissing a warning.
Confidentiality (vulnerable system)
HighSerious loss of confidentiality on the vulnerable system.
Integrity (vulnerable system)
HighSerious loss of integrity on the vulnerable system.
Availability (vulnerable system)
HighSerious loss of availability on the vulnerable system.
Confidentiality (other systems)
NoneNo loss of confidentiality on systems beyond the vulnerable one.
Integrity (other systems)
NoneNo loss of integrity on systems beyond the vulnerable one.
Availability (other systems)
NoneNo loss of availability on systems beyond the vulnerable one.

Vector: 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/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X. Scored by CNA (eclipse.org).

Official description

The GUIX binary resource (theme) loader sizes its arena and populates it in two separate passes that traverse the resource file with independent cursor arithmetic. Because `gx_page_header_data_size` is never validated against the glyph data a page actually contains, the two passes can read different page headers for the same font page, derive different glyph counts, and reserve less than the load pass writes. The excess is written past the end of the arena, with content taken verbatim from the file. The overflowed buffer is allocated by GUIX itself, through `_gx_system_memory_allocator`, rather than supplied by the caller. The public API `gx_binres_theme_load()` takes no size parameter, so no amount of caller diligence prevents this. Reproduces in the shipped default configuration; `GX_BINARY_RESOURCE_SUPPORT` is enabled by default.

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

The underlying weakness: Out-of-bounds Write

The product writes data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.

How developers prevent this class of flaw

  • Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. For example, many languages that perform their own memory management, such as Java and Perl, are not subject to buffer overflows. Other languages, such as Ada and C#, typically provide overflow protection, but the protection can be disabled by the programmer. Be wary that a language's interface to native code may still be subject to overflows, even if the language itself is theoretically safe.
  • Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid. Examples include the Safe C String Library (SafeStr) by Messier and Viega, and the Strsafe.h library from Microsoft. These libraries provide safer versions of overflow-prone string-handling functions.
  • Use automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index checking. D3-SFCV (Stack Frame Canary Validation) from D3FEND discusses canary-based detection in detail.

More Out-of-bounds Write vulnerabilities (CWE-787)

Timeline

  1. CVE record published.
  2. CISA published its SSVC assessment (exploitation: none, automatable: no, technical impact: total).
  3. Record last changed materially (score, affected products, status or references).

References

Recent Out-of-bounds Write vulnerabilities

Spotted an error? Tell us.