Skip to content

Product

artifex ghostscript vulnerabilities

129 published CVES affecting artifex ghostscript, from public sources (CVE.org, NVD, CISA KEV, FIRST EPSS, OSV).

Total
129
Critical
12
High
55
Medium
60
Low
2
Unscored
0
CISA KEV
1

Latest artifex ghostscript CVEs

Newest publication first · page 1 of 6

  1. HighCVSS 7.8 EPSS 0.39%

    An issue was discovered in base/gsdevice.c in Artifex Ghostscript before 10.04.0. An integer overflow when parsing the filename format string (for the output filename) results in path truncation, and possible path traversal and code execution.

  2. HighCVSS 8.8 EPSS 1.4%

    An issue was discovered in Artifex Ghostscript before 10.03.1. contrib/opvp/gdevopvp.c allows arbitrary code execution via a custom Driver library, exploitable via a crafted PostScript document. This occurs because the Driver parameter for opvp (and oprp) devices can have an arbi...

  3. MediumCVSS 6.3 EPSS 0.52%

    An issue was discovered in Artifex Ghostscript before 10.03.1. There is path traversal (via a crafted PostScript document) to arbitrary files if the current directory is in the permitted paths. For example, there can be a transformation of ../../foo to ./../../foo and this will g...

  4. MediumCVSS 5.3 EPSS 0.45%

    An issue was discovered in Artifex Ghostscript before 10.03.1. Path traversal and command execution can occur (via a crafted PostScript document) because of path reduction in base/gpmisc.c. For example, restrictions on use of %pipe% can be bypassed via the aa/../%pipe%command# ou...

  5. HighCVSS 7.5 EPSS 1.1%

    Artifex Ghostscript before 10.03.1, when Tesseract is used for OCR, has a directory traversal issue that allows arbitrary file reading (and writing of error messages to arbitrary files) via OCRLanguage. For example, exploitation can use debug_file /tmp/out and user_patterns_file...

Sources: CVE.org, NVD, CISA KEV, FIRST EPSS, OSV and public exploit-reference metadata. Product matching comes from the published CVE records. A proof-of-concept means public code exists; it is not evidence of exploitation.