Skip to content

CVE-2026-45696

Is CVE-2026-45696 real, exploitable, or a false positive? Here's the community verdict.

signals

public sources

Exploited in wild
Not listed
CISA KEV
Public exploit
None known
Metasploit/EDB/PoC
Base severity
6.5 Medium
CVSS
Exploitation prob.
0.3%
FIRST EPSS
Weakness
CWE-122
CWE

Moderate signals. Triage by your actual exposure and reachability.

baseline read

auto · not a community verdict

Low signal — verdict needed

Few public signals point to active risk. Whether a scanner hit here is a true or false positive depends on your version and config — community verdicts decide.

Based on CVSS · FIRST EPSS

Confirm or dispute →

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

OpenEXR is the reference implementation and specification for the EXR image format, widely used in the motion picture industry. In versions 3.4.0 through 3.4.11, the HTJ2K (High-Throughput JPEG 2000) decoder, ht_undo_impl() in OpenEXRCore is vulnerable to a heap-buffer-overflow READ. The ht_undo_imp function copies decoded pixels out of a per-line OpenJPH buffer using the EXR channel's declared width as the iteration count. The codestream embedded in the EXR chunk can declare different (smaller) tile/line dimensions than the EXR header advertises, but ht_undo_impl() does not validate this — it pulls width 32-bit samples from cur_line->i32[] without checking the OpenJPH line buffer's actual length. A crafted EXR file produces a 4-byte heap-buffer-overflow READ immediately after a buffer allocated by ojph::local::codestream::finalize_alloc(). The bug is reachable through the standard scanline-decode entry point used by every consumer of exr_decoding_run/Imf::checkOpenEXRFile, including thumbnailers, asset pipelines, and the exrcheck utility — i.e. any application that opens untrusted EXR files. The result is a deterministic crash (DoS) and potential adjacent-heap leak. This issue has been fixed in version 3.4.12.

Published

Embed this verdict
TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-45696
Markdown
[![TruePositive verdict](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-45696/badge.svg)](https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-45696)
HTML
<a href="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-45696"><img src="https://www.truepositive.app/cve/CVE-2026-45696/badge.svg" alt="TruePositive verdict for CVE-2026-45696"></a>

Live badge that updates automatically as the community verdict changes.

Community ground truth

Be the first practitioner to weigh in

So far this is only TruePositive's editorial baseline from public sources. Add your real-world verdict below — it becomes the signal the next person triaging this relies on.

🥇 The first 50 practitioners to contribute earn a Founding Contributor badge.

In your experience, is this finding real and exploitable?

awaiting field verdicts
Real, but not a risk here
Not a real issue

No account needed. Anonymous verdicts post as an unverified signal. Log in to make yours verified and earn reputation.

Field notes & remediation

Verdicts are the quick signal. Notes are the evidence and fixes behind them.

No notes yet. Be the first to share what you saw, or a fix that worked.

    Add a field note or remediationoptional
    Note type

    What are you adding?

    Markdown supported · minimum 20 characters.

    Same weakness: CWE-122.