CVE Intelligence
Medium Memory corruption

CVE-2026-23868 — Double Free in Giflib

Giflib contains a double-free vulnerability that is the result of a shallow copy in GifMakeSavedImage and incorrect error handling. The conditions needed to trigger this vulnerability are difficult but may be possible.

Published Mar 10, 2026 · Updated Oct 13, 2026 · Sources: NIST National Vulnerability Database, CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP · CNA: Meta

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 0.2% (30-day exploitation probability)+1
  • Technical severity (medium)+3

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
0.15%
ahead of 4% of scored CVEs · Oct 14, 2026
Affects
Giflib
Giflib
CVSS base
5.1
Medium · 3 source(s)
Prioritization reference: 7.0 provisional

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
None
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.

  • Documented patch — sourceforge.net (NIST National Vulnerability Database)

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 (Giflib Giflib, Giflib Project Giflib).
  2. Apply the fixed version or the patch documented under Remediation.
  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
Giflib Giflib ≥ 5.0.0 and ≤ 6.1.1 Vulnerable CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
Giflib Project Giflib ≥ 5.0.0 and ≤ 6.1.1 Vulnerable NIST National Vulnerability Database

Attack characteristics

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

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

Every base score collected

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

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactScored by
7.0 CVSS 3.1 High 1.0 5.9 0b0ca135-0b70-47e7-9f44-1890c2a1c46c via NIST National Vulnerability Database
5.1 CVSS 3.1 Medium 1.4 3.6 134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0 via NIST National Vulnerability Database
5.1 CVSS 3.1 Medium — — CISA-ADP via CVE Program (cve.org) e CISA ADP
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H (score shown at the top: 134c704f-9b21-4f2e-91b3-4a467353bcc0)
Scoring entities (NIST, CNA, ADP) score independently; each score is shown with its origin. For prioritization we use 7.0 (0b0ca135-0b70-47e7-9f44-1890c2a1c46c via NIST National Vulnerability Database) as a conservative provisional reference — not a definitive official score.

Weakness MITRE

Weakness class according to MITRE’s CWE catalog.

CWE-415 · Double Free

Other CVEs with this weakness →

EPSS over time FIRST

Oct 13, 2026 → Oct 14, 2026 · 2 reading(s) · max 0.15%

Detection

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

  • Local/physical vector: focus on endpoint telemetry (EDR) from affected hosts.
  • Correlate service crashes/restarts with inbound traffic; repeated crashes may indicate attempts.
endpoint telemetry (EDR)crash dumps

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first.

  • 2026
  • Affected products added · giflib/giflib
    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
  • Fix documented
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVSS changed · 5.1
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Source status changed · → Modified
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • Record created in this database
    Oct 13, 2026 · NIST National Vulnerability Database
  • CVE published
    Mar 10, 2026 · Meta

Source activity

Repeated readings are counted rather than listed.

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

References

27 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Giflib
every CVE for this vendor
Memory corruption
same class
CWE-415
other pages naming this weakness

Related CVEs (same products)

  • CVE-2026-26740 Out-of-bounds Write in Giflib Project Giflib Mar 18, 2026
  • CVE-2023-48161 Out-of-bounds Write in Giflib Project Giflib Nov 22, 2023

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 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-2026-23868 is "Double Free in Giflib", rated Medium. It affects Giflib (Giflib); versions are in the scope table. It is not in CISA KEV, which does not rule out exploitation. CVSS 5.1 describes technical severity. EPSS 0.15% 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.