CVE-2022-24130: xterm through Patch 370, when Sixel support is enabled, allows attackers to trigger a buffer overflow in set_sixel in graphics_sixel.c via c
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 23/100)
- The sources we track (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei, GitHub) show no public exploit code or exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 1.6% (FIRST EPSS); higher than 77% of all records.
- Someone with local access to the system can trigger it. No account or password is required. A user must open a link or visit a page. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- Fixed version: xterm (AlmaLinux:9) 366-12.el9_6; xterm-resize (AlmaLinux:9) 366-12.el9_6; xterm (Alpine:v3.15) 371-r0.
Low priority for now. Upgrade to xterm (AlmaLinux:9) 366-12.el9_6; xterm-resize (AlmaLinux:9) 366-12.el9_6; xterm (Alpine:v3.15) 371-r0 or later.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS
xterm through Patch 370, when Sixel support is enabled, allows attackers to trigger a buffer overflow in set_sixel in graphics_sixel.c via crafted text.
- Published
- Jan 31, 2022
- Updated
- Jun 17, 2026
- EPSS
- 1.6% · 77th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-120
Report tools
Action score
23
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 22 / 40 · 5.5 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 1 / 30 · 1.6%
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- No public exploit code on record
- A fix has been released
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| invisible-island | xterm | cpe:2.3:a:invisible-island:xterm |
| debian | debian linux | cpe:2.3:o:debian:debian_linux |
| fedoraproject | fedora | cpe:2.3:o:fedoraproject:fedora |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- debian debian linux9.0
- fedoraproject fedora34
- fedoraproject fedora35
- invisible-island xtermup to 370 inclusive
Package-level exposure
OSV and GitHub Advisory data: ecosystem, package and range. SBOM matching uses this table.
| Ecosystem | Package | Affected range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| AlmaLinux:9 | xterm | before 366-12.el9_6 | 366-12.el9_6 |
| AlmaLinux:9 | xterm-resize | before 366-12.el9_6 | 366-12.el9_6 |
| Alpine:v3.15 | xterm | before 371-r0 | 371-r0 |
| Debian:12 | xterm | before 370-2 | 370-2 |
| Debian:9 | xterm | before 327-2+deb9u2 | 327-2+deb9u2 |
| openSUSE:Leap 15.3 | xterm | before 330-150200.11.6.1 | 330-150200.11.6.1 |
| openSUSE:Tumbleweed | mlterm | before 3.9.2-3.1 | 3.9.2-3.1 |
| Red Hat:enterprise_linux:9::appstream | xterm | before 0:366-12.el9_6 | 0:366-12.el9_6 |
| Red Hat:enterprise_linux:9::appstream | xterm-debuginfo | before 0:366-12.el9_6 | 0:366-12.el9_6 |
| Red Hat:enterprise_linux:9::appstream | xterm-debugsource | before 0:366-12.el9_6 | 0:366-12.el9_6 |
| Red Hat:enterprise_linux:9::appstream | xterm-resize | before 0:366-12.el9_6 | 0:366-12.el9_6 |
| Red Hat:enterprise_linux:9::appstream | xterm-resize-debuginfo | before 0:366-12.el9_6 | 0:366-12.el9_6 |
| Rocky Linux:9 | xterm | before 0:366-12.el9_6 | 0:366-12.el9_6 |
| SUSE:Linux Enterprise Module for Basesystem 15 SP3 | xterm | before 330-150200.11.6.1 | 330-150200.11.6.1 |
| SUSE:Linux Enterprise Server 12 SP5 | xterm | before 308-5.6.1 | 308-5.6.1 |
Same product
invisible-island: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2022-45063xterm before 375 allows code execution via font ops, e.g., because an OSC 50 response may have Ctrl-g and therefore lead to command executio41Plan
- CVE-2021-27135xterm before Patch #366 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service (segmentation fault) via a crafted UT41Plan
- CVE-2023-40359xterm before 380 supports ReGIS reporting for character-set names even if they have unexpected characters (i.e., neither alphanumeric nor un39Monitor
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2008-2383Jan 2, 2009 · CRLF injection vulnerability in xterm allows user-assisted attackers to execute arbitrary commands via LF (aka \n) characters surrounding a 38Monitor
Remediation
Which version to upgrade to
Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.
| Product / package | Fixed version | Source |
|---|---|---|
| almalinux:xterm | 366-12.el9_6 · AlmaLinux:9 | Package registry (OSV) |
| almalinux:xterm-resize | 366-12.el9_6 · AlmaLinux:9 | Package registry (OSV) |
| alpine:xterm | 371-r0 · Alpine:v3.15 | Package registry (OSV) |
| debian:xterm | 370-2 · Debian:12 | Package registry (OSV) |
| opensuse:mlterm | 3.9.2-3.1 · openSUSE:Tumbleweed | Package registry (OSV) |
| opensuse:xterm | 330-150200.11.6.1 · openSUSE:Leap 15.3 | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:xterm | 0:366-12.el9_6 · Red Hat:enterprise_linux:9::appstream | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:xterm-debuginfo | 0:366-12.el9_6 · Red Hat:enterprise_linux:9::appstream | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:xterm-debugsource | 0:366-12.el9_6 · Red Hat:enterprise_linux:9::appstream | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:xterm-resize | 0:366-12.el9_6 · Red Hat:enterprise_linux:9::appstream | Package registry (OSV) |
| red hat:xterm-resize-debuginfo | 0:366-12.el9_6 · Red Hat:enterprise_linux:9::appstream | Package registry (OSV) |
| rocky linux:xterm | 0:366-12.el9_6 · Rocky Linux:9 | Package registry (OSV) |
| suse:xterm | 308-5.6.1 · SUSE:Linux Enterprise Server 12 SP5 | Package registry (OSV) |
| suse:xterm | 330-150200.11.6.1 · SUSE:Linux Enterprise Module for Basesystem 15 SP3 | Package registry (OSV) |
Exploit status
No known public exploit
No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.
Research context
For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.
Timeline
From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.
No dated events beyond publication.
No history yet (it accumulates with the daily EPSS job).
Patch and commit links
Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.
No commit or PR link among the references.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
No credits in the CNA record.
Variant candidates
Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.
No nightly-computed relations.
Chain candidates
An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.
—
Bug bounty scope
No known public program.
Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).
Technical details
Attack conditions
- Someone with local access to the system can trigger it.
- No account or password is required.
- A user must open a link or visit a page.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- none
- Integrity
- none
- Availability
- high · the service can be disrupted
- Attack vector
- Local
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- None
- Integrity impact
- None
- Availability impact
- High
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-120 · Buffer Copy without Checking Size of Input ('Classic Buffer Overflow')CVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
nvd-primary
Root cause
When data is copied, the source length is not compared with the size of the destination buffer. Excess data overwrites adjacent memory.
The bug in code
The whole CWE-120 classA representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.
Vulnerable
char buf[256];
memcpy(buf, pkt->data, pkt->len);Fixed
char buf[256];
if (pkt->len > sizeof(buf)) {
return -EINVAL;
}
memcpy(buf, pkt->data, pkt->len);Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
- Buffer Overflow via Environment VariablesCAPEC-10likelihood: High · High
- Overflow BuffersCAPEC-100likelihood: High · Very High
- Client-side Injection-induced Buffer OverflowCAPEC-14likelihood: Medium · High
- Filter Failure through Buffer OverflowCAPEC-24likelihood: High · High
- MIME ConversionCAPEC-42likelihood: High · High
- Overflow Binary Resource FileCAPEC-44likelihood: High · Very High
- Buffer Overflow via Symbolic LinksCAPEC-45likelihood: High · High
- Overflow Variables and TagsCAPEC-46likelihood: High · High
ATT&CK techniques
—
Change log
- Fix✗ → ✓
For records you follow, these changes also arrive as notifications. →
References
Show all references (4 more)Show less
- lists.debian.org/debian-lts-announce/2022/02/msg00007.html
- lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce%40lists.fedoraproject.org/message/BP5Y4O7WBNLV24D22E6LE7RQFYOUVD2U/
- lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-announce%40lists.fedoraproject.org/message/T4CWYYEBT6AJRJBBQU2KLUOQDHRM7WAV/
- security.gentoo.org/glsa/202208-22
Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.