CVE-2025-64429

DuckDB Encryption Crypto implementation is vulnerable

MEDIUM
6.5
CVSS Score
Published: November 12, 2025 at 09:32 PM UTC
Updated: October 19, 2026 at 01:10 PM UTC
1 product affected across 1 vendorDuckdb

Using duckdb by duckdb?

Get instant alerts when new vulnerabilities affect duckdb - before attackers find them.

Real-time alertsTrack your software stackFree plan available
Severity
MEDIUM6.5
Exploit prediction
EPSS 0.1%
SSVC
No known exploit

Description

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.

Affected

Our own answer: ranges merged, affected separated from platform-only, with confidence and review flags.

1.4.0 ≤ v < 1.4.2
Affected range stops below 1.4.2, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement

Remediation

No guide yet

No remediation guidance has been written for this CVE yet. What the record does show:

References (4)

SSVC — Action Prioritization

SSVCNo known exploitNot automatablePartial impact

SSVC signals action urgency (what to patch first), separate from CVSS which measures severity.

CVSS

Attack Vector
NETWORK
Complexity
LOW
Privileges
NONE
User Interaction
NONE
Scope
UNCHANGED
Confidentiality
LOW
Integrity
LOW
Availability
NONE
Vector?

Quick Info

StatusANALYZED
CWE
CWE-327

Get alerted

Stop reading CVE feeds looking for your own stack

Track the products you run and VulnTracker tells you when a new CVE affects them — with what is known about fixing it, and nothing about the rest.

Free plan, no card