Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- A structured source references public exploit or proof-of-concept material.
- EPSS is 0.51% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2025
CVE-2025-62494High confidence
Type confusion in string addition in QuickJS
QuickJS · QuickJS
7.1HighCVSS 4.0
Within 7 days
Fix not verifiedHigh technical severity with public exploit material referenced by a structured source; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityHigh→Operational priority:High, unchanged from published severity.unchanged
Compensating controls
- Restrict local access and enforce least privilege on affected hosts.
- Increase monitoring for the attack path and post-exploitation behaviour described in the report.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs QuickJS QuickJS and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Recheck the vendor advisory before scheduling a change because no verified fixed version is currently retained.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Distribution package intelligence
4 package statesRelease-specific package status
Debian, ubuntu findings are scoped to the named distribution, release and source package. An absent finding does not mean a package is unaffected.
Repository candidate not checked
A published vendor fix does not prove that a matching update is enabled and installable on a particular asset. Confirm the local package candidate before scheduling remediation.
| Distribution release | Source package | Vendor state | Fixed version | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debian trixietrixie · source | quickjs | Affected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open. | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 7 Oct 2026 |
| Debian forkyforky · source | quickjs | Affected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open. | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 7 Oct 2026 |
| Debian sidsid · source | quickjs | Affected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open. | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 7 Oct 2026 |
| Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · esm-apps | quickjs | Under evaluationCanonical reports that the package might be affected and still needs evaluation or fixing. | Not published in this feed | Canonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 6 Oct 2026 |
High technical severity with public exploit material referenced by a structured source; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance.
Fix not verified01
What, why and how
A type confusion vulnerability exists in the handling of the string addition (+) operation within the QuickJS engine. * The code first checks if the left-hand operand is a string. * It then attempts to convert the right-hand operand to a primitive value using JS_ToPrimitiveFree. This conversion can trigger a callback (e.g., toString or valueOf). * During this callback, an attacker can modify the type of the left-hand operand in memory, changing it from a string to a different type (e.g., an object or an array). * The code then proceeds to call JS_ConcatStringInPlace, which still treats the modified left-hand value as a string. This mismatch between the assumed type (string) and the actual type allows an attacker to control the data structure being processed by the concatenation logic, resulting in a type confusion condition. This can lead to out-of-bounds memory access, potentially resulting in memory corruption and arbitrary code execution in the context of the QuickJS runtime.
What
A type confusion vulnerability exists in the handling of the string addition (+) operation within the QuickJS engine. * The code first checks if the left-hand operand is a string. * It then attempts to convert the right-hand operand to a primitive value using JS_ToPrimitiveFree. This conversion can trigger a callback (e.g., toString or valueOf). * During this callback, an attacker can modify the type of the left-hand operand in memory, changing it from a string to a different type (e.g., an object or an array). * The code then proceeds to call JS_ConcatStringInPlace, which still treats the modified left-hand value as a string. This mismatch between the assumed type (string) and the actual type allows an attacker to control the data structure being processed by the concatenation logic, resulting in a type confusion condition. This can lead to out-of-bounds memory access, potentially resulting in memory corruption and arbitrary code execution in the context of the QuickJS runtime.
Why
The product does not correctly convert an object, resource, or structure from one type to a different type.
How
An attacker operating through an adjacent network may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may execute code or commands in the affected security context.
What
A type confusion vulnerability exists in the handling of the string addition (+) operation within the QuickJS engine. * The code first checks if the left-hand operand is a string. * It then attempts to convert the right-hand operand to a primitive value using JS_ToPrimitiveFree. This conversion can trigger a callback (e.g., toString or valueOf). * During this callback, an attacker can modify the type of the left-hand operand in memory, changing it from a string to a different type (e.g., an object or an array). * The code then proceeds to call JS_ConcatStringInPlace, which still treats the modified left-hand value as a string. This mismatch between the assumed type (string) and the actual type allows an attacker to control the data structure being processed by the concatenation logic, resulting in a type confusion condition. This can lead to out-of-bounds memory access, potentially resulting in memory corruption and arbitrary code execution in the context of the QuickJS runtime.
Why
The product does not correctly convert an object, resource, or structure from one type to a different type.
How
An attacker operating through an adjacent network may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may execute code or commands in the affected security context.
02
Exploit reality and attack path
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
Observed exploitation No confirmed evidence
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
Public PoC / exploit material Reference recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.A structured CVE source labels at least one public reference as exploit material. BlackTree has not independently validated that it is safe, reliable or weaponised.
- Likely attack path
- an adjacent network → Incorrect Type Conversion or Cast → execute code or commands in the affected security context
- Attack surface
- Adjacent
- Privileges required
- Low: a basic authenticated account is required
- User interaction
- Passive interaction required
- Attack complexity
- High: exploitation depends on specific conditions
- Security boundary
- Not a CVSS 4.0 base metric
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness. - CWE-704 ↗
CWE-704: Incorrect Type Conversion or Cast. The product does not correctly convert an object, resource, or structure from one type to a different type.
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:4.0/AV:A/AC:H/AT:P/PR:L/UI:P/VC:H/VI:H/VA:L/SC:H/SI:H/SA:LCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 4.0: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVAdjacentAttack vector: The attacker must be on an adjacent or logically close network.ACHighAttack complexity: Successful exploitation depends on specific conditions outside the attacker's direct control.ATPresentAttack requirements: A particular deployment or execution condition must be present.PRLowPrivileges required: The attacker needs basic user-level privileges.UIPassiveUser interaction: A user must unknowingly interact with the vulnerable system.VCHighVulnerable-system confidentiality: A successful attack can cause a major loss.VIHighVulnerable-system integrity: A successful attack can cause a major loss.VALowVulnerable-system availability: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.SCHighSubsequent-system confidentiality: A successful attack can cause a major loss.SIHighSubsequent-system integrity: A successful attack can cause a major loss.SALowSubsequent-system availability: A successful attack can cause a limited loss.- Post-exploitation / living off the land
- After compromise, an attacker may use built-in shells, scripting engines, scheduled tasks and native network utilities for discovery, persistence or movement. This is a plausible LoTL path, not evidence that it has occurred for every attack.
03
Patch and workaround
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
- Status
?
Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change. - Fix not verified
- Affected
- QuickJS: 2025-04-26 < 2025-09-13
- Fixed
- No fixed version is explicitly recorded in the structured CVE data.
- Action
- No verified patch reference is present in the current structured sources. Check the vendor advisory before making a change.
- Workaround
- No verified workaround is recorded. Limit untrusted access and use least privilege until authoritative guidance is available.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 16 Oct 2025 · Last source change 16 Oct 2025, 17:46 UTC · CWE-704 · Incorrect Type Conversion or Cast
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.1
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2025-34780
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD enriched
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
- CVE
- Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
- CVSS
- Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
- EPSS
- Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
- CWE
- Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
- CNA
- CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
- CISA ADP
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
- NVD
- National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
- CERT / CSIRT
- A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
- PoC
- Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
- CSAF
- Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
- LoTL
- Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.