CVE-2024-41132 is a medium-severity (CVSS 5.3) CWE-789 vulnerability in SixLabors.ImageSharp. A fix is available for SixLabors.ImageSharp — see the affected versions and patch details below.
SixLabors ImageSharp Allows Excessive Memory Allocation in Gif Decoder
Exploitation Status
No confirmed exploitation observed yet
- CISA assesses this as automatable — exploitation doesn’t require manual, per-target effort, which raises the odds of mass scanning and opportunistic attacks.
- CISA’s own triage has not observed active exploitation or public proof-of-concept code for this CVE as of its last assessment.
Exploitation and automatability from CISA’s SSVC triage for CVE-2024-41132.
EPSS Exploitation Probability
EPSS (Exploit Prediction Scoring System) is a daily probability model maintained by FIRST.org. It estimates the likelihood a CVE will be exploited in production environments within the next 30 days, derived from real-world threat intelligence signals.
How urgent is this, really
CVE-2024-41132 plotted by exploitation likelihood (EPSS) against impact (CVSS). The shaded corner — EPSS 50%+ and CVSS 7.0+ — is where this CVE doesn't sit, though severity or exploitability alone can still warrant action.
Where this sits among everything scored
Of 378,567 CVEs with a current EPSS score, this one falls in the < 10% band (highlighted). Real counts from FIRST.org, not a sample — log-scaled since the landscape is heavily right-skewed.
Real-World Exposure
SixLabors.ImageSharp.NETSixLabors.ImageSharpReal-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects NuGet packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.
Description
Impact
What kind of vulnerability is it? Who is impacted?
A vulnerability discovered in the ImageSharp library, where the processing of specially crafted files can lead to excessive memory usage in the Gif decoder. The vulnerability is triggered when ImageSharp attempts to process image files that are designed to exploit this flaw.
Patches
Has the problem been patched? What versions should users upgrade to?
The problem has been patched. All users are advised to upgrade to v3.1.5 or v2.1.9.
Workarounds
Is there a way for users to fix or remediate the vulnerability without upgrading?
Before calling Image.Decode(Async), use Image.Identify to determine the image dimensions in order to enforce a limit.
References
Are there any links users can visit to find out more?
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| .NETNuGet | SixLabors.ImageSharp | all versions | 2.1.9dotnet add package SixLabors.ImageSharp --version 2.1.9 |
| .NETNuGet | SixLabors.ImageSharp | ≥ 3.0.0&&< 3.1.5 | 3.1.5dotnet add package SixLabors.ImageSharp --version 3.1.5 |
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for SixLabors.ImageSharp, including transitive dependencies — a direct dependency you never call can still pull in a vulnerable version.
Fix
Update SixLabors.ImageSharp to 2.1.9 or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms CVE-2024-41132 is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
Workarounds
If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.
How O3 protects you
O3 Security's impact-aware SCA analyses which vulnerable code paths your application actually calls, so a match like CVE-2024-41132 can be triaged on real exposure rather than presence alone.
Tailored to CVE-2024-41132. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is CVE-2024-41132 in your dependencies?
O3 Security finds CVE-2024-41132 across NuGet dependencies, including transitive ones, and its impact-aware SCA ranks findings by whether your code actually calls the vulnerable path.