Description

Double free in Microsoft Graphics Component allows an unauthorized attacker to execute code over a network.

Executive Summary

Technical Details

Mitigations

References

Additional Metadata

{
  "score": "9.8",
  "pubDate": "2026-09-08T18:20:35.187Z",
  "pubdate": "2026-09-08T18:20:35.187Z",
  "executiveSummary": "This vulnerability is identified as a double free memory corruption flaw residing within the Microsoft Graphics Component. A double free occurs when an application calls the free() function on the same memory address multiple times without an intermediate allocation, potentially leading to heap metadata corruption.\nThe vulnerability allows an unauthenticated, remote attacker to trigger arbitrary code execution on target systems. By supplying a specially crafted file or stream to the vulnerable component, an attacker can manipulate heap structures to gain control over the instruction pointer.\nThe Microsoft Graphics Component is a core library responsible for rendering various graphical formats; as such, it is frequently invoked by common productivity applications and web browsers, increasing the overall attack surface.\nSuccessful exploitation allows for the execution of code in the context of the current user, leading to full system compromise, data exfiltration, or the installation of persistent malware. The vulnerability is considered high-risk due to its network exploitability and potential for remote code execution (RCE). No specific user interaction is mentioned, but typical attack vectors involve convincing a user to open a malicious document or navigate to a malicious website.",
  "technicalDetails": "The vulnerability originates from improper memory management within the Microsoft Graphics Component during the processing of graphical data structures. A double free condition arises when the component logic attempts to deallocate a memory pointer that has already been returned to the heap allocator. In a typical memory management lifecycle, the application tracks object ownership; however, flawed state synchronization leads to a race condition or a logic error where the deallocation routine is invoked twice on the same heap chunk.\nFrom an exploitation perspective, a double free is a powerful primitive for memory corruption. When the first free() call occurs, the memory allocator marks the memory chunk as available and adds it to the heap's free list. If an attacker can force the application to perform an intermediate allocation before the second free() call, they may be able to overlap the memory regions. The second free() call, when performed on a chunk already present in the free list, corrupts the internal heap metadata, such as the forward and backward pointers (in glibc-style allocators) or similar integrity checks in the Windows Heap Manager.\nAttack flow typically proceeds as follows: First, the attacker delivers a malicious payload, such as an image file containing malformed headers or an embedded stream, designed to trigger the Graphics Component's parsing logic. As the component processes the object, the logic error is triggered, causing the secondary free operation. By spraying the heap with controlled data prior to or during the triggered double free, the attacker can overwrite heap metadata. This manipulation allows for a 'write-what-where' primitive, where an attacker can overwrite critical function pointers, such as those within a Virtual Method Table (vtable) or the Global Offset Table (GOT).\nOnce the attacker successfully redirects the control flow of the application to their chosen memory address, they can execute shellcode or pivot to a Return-Oriented Programming (ROP) chain to bypass modern exploit mitigations like Data Execution Prevention (DEP) and Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR). The resulting impact is the execution of arbitrary code with the privilege level of the underlying application process. Because the Graphics Component often runs with significant system or user-level access, this provides the attacker with a stable foothold for further post-exploitation activities, including credential harvesting, lateral movement, or complete system takeover."
}