CVE Intelligence
Medium Memory corruption exploit reference

CVE-2025-62493 — Heap out-of-bounds read in js_bigint_to_string1 in QuickJS

A vulnerability exists in the QuickJS engine's BigInt string conversion logic (js_bigint_to_string1) due to an incorrect calculation of the required number of digits, which in turn leads to reading memory past the allocated BigInt structure. * The function determines the number of characters (n_digits) needed for the string representation by calculating: $$ \\ \text{n\_digits} = (\text{n\_bits} + \text{log2\_radix} - 1) / \text{log2\_radix}$$ $$$$This formula is off-by-one in certain edge cases when calculating the necessary memory limbs. For instance, a 127-bit BigInt using radix 32 (where $\text{log2\_radix}=5$) is calculated to need $\text{n\_digits}=26$. * The maximum number of bits actually stored is $\text{n\_bits}=127$, which requires only two 64-bit limbs ($\text{JS\_LIMB\_BITS}=64$). * The conversion loop iterates $\text{n\_digits}=26$ times, attempting to read 5 bits in each iteration, totaling $26 \times 5 = 130$ bits. * In the final iterations of the loop, the code attempts to read data that spans two limbs: C c = (r->tab[pos] >> shift) | (r->tab[pos + 1] << (JS_LIMB_BITS - shift)); * Since the BigInt was only allocated two limbs, the read operation for r->tab[pos + 1] becomes an Out-of-Bounds Read when pos points to the last valid limb (e.g., $pos=1$). This vulnerability allows an attacker to cause the engine to read and process data from the memory immediately following the BigInt buffer. This can lead to Information Disclosure of sensitive data stored on the heap adjacent to the BigInt object.

Published Oct 16, 2025 · Updated Oct 13, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP, GitHub Security Advisories · CNA: Google

Who exploits it and how urgent it is

A 0–100 score combining confirmed exploitation, ransomware and APT use, public exploits, EPSS and severity.

No exploitation signal in the sources consulted so far.
How the score was calculated
  • EPSS 0.4% (30-day exploitation probability)+5
  • Technical severity (medium)+3
  • CISA SSVC: exploitation "poc"+5

The score orders the patch queue; it does not replace your asset context (internet exposure, criticality, compensating controls).

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the sources call it.

Exploitation
Not confirmed
Not in CISA KEV — an absence of record, not proof it is unexploited.
EPSS FIRST
0.38%
ahead of 31% of scored CVEs · Oct 15, 2026
Affects
QuickJS
QuickJS and 1 more
CVSS base
6.5
Medium · 4 source(s)

CISA SSVC assessment CISA

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses (SSVC 2.0.3). A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

Exploitation
Proof of concept
none · proof-of-concept · active
Automatable
No
can an attacker script the kill-chain steps
Technical impact
Partial
partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Remediation

Fixes and mitigations documented by the sources — linked to the original advisory.

No fix documented by the sources we poll. That does not mean none exists: check the vendor advisory.

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record’s own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found. A rule-generated starting point.

  1. Identify exposed assets running the affected vendor/product/version combinations (QuickJS QuickJS, Quickjs Project Quickjs).
  2. No fix documented in the sources: reduce exposure and monitor the vendor advisory.
  3. Search available logs for exploit probes matching the vulnerability class (memory corruption), errors and authentication anomalies.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and versions as the sources word them.

VendorProductVersionsStatusSource
QuickJS QuickJS ≥ 2025-04-26 and < 2025-09-13 Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
Quickjs Project Quickjs < 2025-09-13 Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database

Attack characteristics

The CVSS vector, decoded. It describes the attack, not your exposure to it.

Attack vector
Adjacent
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
High
Integrity
None
Availability
None

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and may disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactScored by
5.9 CVSS 4.0 Medium — — cve-coordination@google.com via NIST National Vulnerability Database
5.9 CVSS 4.0 Medium — — Google via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
6.5 CVSS 3.1 Medium 2.8 3.6 nvd@nist.gov via NIST National Vulnerability Database
6.5 CVSS 3.1 Medium — — GitHub, Inc. via GitHub Security Advisories
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N (score shown at the top: nvd@nist.gov)

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-125 · Out-of-bounds Read

Other CVEs with this weakness →

EPSS over time FIRST

Oct 13, 2026 → Oct 15, 2026 · 3 reading(s) · max 0.38%

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not tested rules.

  • Correlate service crashes/restarts with inbound traffic; repeated crashes may indicate attempts.
endpoint telemetry (EDR)crash dumps

Analysis and videos

CVE-2025-62493: QuickJS BigInt-to-string heap out-of-bounds read
CVE-2025-62493 is a heap out-of-bounds read in the js_bigint_to_string1 function of the QuickJS engine, caused by an off-by-one error when calculating the number of digits needed for a BigInt string conversion. The record classifies it as CWE-125 with a NVD CVSS 3.1 base score of 6.5 and a Google CVSS 4.0 score of 5.9. The sources consulted show no confirmed active exploitation and no listing in CISA KEV.

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • Affected products added · quickjs/quickjs
    Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • SSVC assessment updated
    Oct 13, 2026 · CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
  • Record published
    Oct 13, 2026
  • CVSS changed · 6.5
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Analyzed
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • 2025
  • CVE published
    Oct 16, 2025 · Google

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

  • 1× References added · Oct 13, 2026 – Oct 13, 2026
  • 1× Official description updated · Oct 13, 2026 – Oct 13, 2026

References

4 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

QuickJS
every CVE for this vendor
CWE-125
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

  • High CVE-2025-69654 Uncontrolled Resource Consumption in Quickjs Project Quickjs Mar 6, 2026
  • Medium CVE-2025-69653 A crafted JavaScript input can trigger an internal assertion failure in QuickJS release… Mar 6, 2026
  • High CVE-2025-62495 Type confusion in string addition in QuickJS Oct 16, 2025
  • High CVE-2025-62496 Integer overflow in js_bigint_from_string in QuickJS Oct 16, 2025
  • High CVE-2025-62490 Use-after-free in js_print_object in QuickJS Oct 16, 2025
  • High CVE-2025-62491 Use-after-free in js_std_promise_rejection_check in QuickJS Oct 16, 2025

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No fixed version, patch or mitigation documented.
  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record

Text assembled only from the fields above — no additional claims.

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2025-62493 is "Heap out-of-bounds read in js_bigint_to_string1 in QuickJS", rated Medium. It affects QuickJS (QuickJS); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 6.5 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.38% estimates the probability of exploitation in 30 days; neither replaces your asset context. First verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run the affected versions, apply vendor fixes or mitigations, and preserve logs for review.

Comments

Moderated technical discussion. Read the community guidelines.

No comments yet.

Sign in or create an account to comment and suggest corrections.