Skip to content
Fencer Intel
medium 6.5

CVE-2025-64429 json

DuckDB Encryption Crypto implementation is vulnerable

published 11mo ago modified 21d ago also EUVD-2025-150399 , GHSA-vmp8-hg63-v2hp , JLSEC-2026-775 , PYSEC-2025-112

cvss
6.5
version 3.1, NVD
cisa kev
Not listed
not in CISA's catalog
epss
0.1%
EPSS 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days, percentile 1%
public exploits
0
none known

Summary

DuckDB is a SQL database management system. DuckDB implemented block-based encryption of DB on the filesystem starting with DuckDB 1.4.0. There are a few issues related to this implementation. The DuckDB can fall back to an insecure random number generator (pcg32) to generate cryptographic keys or IVs. When clearing keys from memory, the compiler may remove the memset() and leave sensitive data on the heap. By modifying the database header, an attacker could downgrade the encryption mode from GCM to CTR to bypass integrity checks. There may be a failure to check return value on call to OpenSSL `rand_bytes()`. An attacker could use public IVs to compromise the internal state of RNG and determine the randomly generated key used to encrypt temporary files, get access to cryptographic keys if they have access to process memory (e.g. through memory leak),circumvent GCM integrity checks, and/or influence the OpenSSL random number generator and DuckDB would not be able to detect a failure of the generator. Version 1.4.2 has disabled the insecure random number generator by no longer using the fallback to write to or create databases. Instead, DuckDB will now attempt to install and load the OpenSSL implementation in the `httpfs` extension. DuckDB now uses secure MbedTLS primitive to clear memory as recommended and requires explicit specification of ciphers without integrity checks like CTR on `ATTACH`. Additionally, DuckDB now checks the return code.

Patch / fix

  • julia DuckDB_jll 1.4.2+0
  • pypi duckdb 1.4.2
  • duckdb duckdb 1.4.2

Is CVE-2025-64429 in your dependencies? Fencer shows which of your repositories are affected as soon as an advisory lands, and opens the fix as a pull request.

Check with Fencer

Vendor advisories

What the vendors themselves say about their products: affected, fixed or not affected, and what to do.

red hat product security vex CVE-2025-64429 updated cvss 6.5

duckdb: Encryption Crypto implementation is vulnerable

  • Red Hat OpenShift AI (RHOAI) rhoai/odh-feature-server-rhel9
    not affected: vulnerable code not present

Red Hat CSAF VEX © Red Hat, Inc., from https://security.access.redhat.com/data/csaf/v2/vex/; changed: reduced to product statuses and remediations. CC BY 4.0 · csaf

CISA SSVC

Exploitation
none
Automatable
no
Technical impact
partial
Assessed
11mo ago

Exploit prediction

0.12% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days, higher than 1% of all scored CVEs (FIRST EPSS, 2026-11-09).

CVSS scores

assigned by version score vector
CNA 4.0 6.9 CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N
CNA 4.0 6.9 CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
NVD 3.1 6.5 CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N
OSV 3.1 6.5 CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:N

Affected packages

ecosystem package affected fixed in
julia DuckDB_jll
>=1.4.1+0, <1.4.2+0
1.4.2+0
pypi duckdb
>=1.4.0, <1.4.2
1.4.2

Affected products

  • duckdb duckdb

Classification

Weakness
  • CWE-327 Use of a Broken or Risky Cryptographic Algorithm

References

Sources

Fencer Intel keeps one entry per vulnerability: the CVE id wins, then GHSA, and records that alias each other are merged, except that two CVEs always keep separate entries. The same data is available as JSON.

CPEs and fixed versions use Anchore's correction of NVD's data: Added CPE configurations because not yet analyzed by NVD.