CVE-2026-48029
High · 7.1CVSS
7.1
EPSS
0.4%
Published
Jul 22, 2026
CISA due date
—
Cloudanix analysis
There is not enough public information yet to know which software is affected or what an attacker could do, so teams should monitor for updates before taking product-specific action.
- Exploitation
- Other
- Attacker needs
- Other
- Complexity
- Moderate
- Impact
- Other
- Component
- Other
- Class
- Other
- Remediation
- No Fix Yet
- Effort
- Other
- Patch risk
- Other
What it actually does
Insufficient public technical detail is available for this identifier to characterize the vulnerability mechanism, affected component, attack vector, required privileges, or post-exploitation impact with confidence. Treat it as an unclassified vulnerability until authoritative vendor, CNA, or NVD details are published.
Why it matters to the business
At this time, the operational risk cannot be reliably assessed because no affected products, vulnerable versions, or technical description are available. The currently low EPSS score and absence from the CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog suggest no broad public exploitation signal, but organizations should continue monitoring because risk can change quickly once details or proof-of-concept code are released.
How an attack unfolds
No credible end-to-end exploitation narrative can be derived from the supplied data. There is no public description of the vulnerable product, attack surface, authentication requirements, exploit primitives, or attacker objective. A realistic attacker workflow would depend entirely on the eventually disclosed affected software and vulnerability class.
How to fix it
No product-specific patch, fixed version, or mitigation is available from the supplied information. Security teams should monitor the assigning CNA, affected vendor advisories, NVD, package repositories, and distribution security trackers for confirmed affected products and fixed versions. Once authoritative fixes are published, prioritize upgrading affected assets, disabling vulnerable features if mitigations are provided, and restricting exposure of the affected service until patched.
How to confirm the fix worked
Because no affected products or fixed versions are identified, validation should focus on intelligence tracking rather than technical testing. Confirm whether any authoritative advisory names a product and version range, then inventory the environment for that software and compare installed versions to the vendor’s fixed versions. If a patch becomes available, verify deployment through package manager output, application version checks, container image rebuilds, SBOM comparison, or vulnerability scanner signatures updated after the advisory publication.
Typical attack path
- Monitor public advisories, commits, package releases, or exploit repositories for technical details once the vulnerability is disclosed.
- Identify organizations running the affected product and vulnerable versions, if any are later confirmed.
- Develop or obtain an exploit based on the disclosed vulnerability class and reachable attack surface.
- Attempt exploitation against exposed vulnerable instances.
- Use any resulting access or impact according to the vulnerability’s actual capability, such as data access, service disruption, privilege escalation, or code execution, if applicable.
How to detect it
There are no reliable exploitation artifacts, log patterns, file indicators, network signatures, or process indicators derivable from the supplied information. SOC teams should monitor threat intelligence sources, vendor advisories, IDS/EDR content updates, exploit repositories, and vulnerability scanner plugin releases for this identifier. If affected software is later identified, collect and review application logs, authentication logs, web access logs, endpoint telemetry, crash logs, and network traffic for anomalies aligned to the disclosed attack vector.
What your security team should do
- Track this identifier in vulnerability intelligence tooling and revisit it when vendor or NVD details are published.
- Do not assign emergency remediation priority based on the current data alone; the EPSS score is low and there is no KEV listing or known ransomware association.
- Ensure external attack surface management, SBOM, and vulnerability scanner data are current so affected assets can be identified quickly if products are later named.
- Create a watch for new exploit references, proof-of-concept repositories, vendor advisories, or package release notes associated with this identifier.
- If affected products are later confirmed in internet-facing or high-value systems, reassess priority immediately and apply vendor fixes or mitigations.
The record
libheif is a HEIF and AVIF file format decoder and encoder. Versions 1.19.0 through 1.21.2 have a heap OOB read in ImageItem_Grid::decode_grid_tile via irot-induced tile-coordinate underflow. Version 1.22.0 fixes the issue.
Affected packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Introduced | Fixed |
|---|---|---|---|
| openSUSE:Leap 16.0 | libheif | 0 | 1.23.0-160000.1.1 |
| openSUSE:Tumbleweed | libheif | 0 | 1.22.2-1.1 |
Related vulnerabilities
- CVE-2026-50142 libheif is a HEIF and AVIF file format decoder and encoder. Also affects libheif
- CVE-2026-47709 libheif is a HEIF and AVIF file format decoder and encoder. Also affects libheif
- CVE-2026-47178 libheif is a HEIF and AVIF file format decoder and encoder. Also affects libheif
- CVE-2026-47247 libheif is a HEIF and AVIF file format decoder and encoder. Also affects libheif
- CVE-2026-47254 libheif is a HEIF and AVIF file format decoder and encoder. Also affects libheif
- CVE-2026-47251 libheif is a HEIF and AVIF file format decoder and encoder. Also affects libheif
- CVE-2026-47714 libheif is a HEIF and AVIF file format decoder and encoder. Also affects libheif
- CVE-2026-49271 libheif is a HEIF and AVIF file format decoder and encoder. Also affects libheif