CVE-2026-46601: WebP VP8 Decoder Panic Vulnerability – Denial of Service Risk
A vulnerability exists in webp image decoder implementations where a specially crafted WebP file containing a VP8 video chunk with mismatched dimensions can cause the decoder to crash. An attacker could trigger this by serving a malicious WebP image to a user or application, resulting in a denial of service. The issue does not allow data theft or system compromise—only service disruption.
Source data · NVD / CISA · public domain
- CVSS
- 3.1 · 7.5 HIGH · CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
- Weaknesses (CWE)
- —
- Affected products
- 0 configuration(s)
- Published / Modified
- 2026-06-25 / 2026-06-26
NVD description (verbatim)
The webp decoder can panic when processing a VP8 chunk with dimensions that do not match the canvas size.
3 reference(s) · View on NVD →
SEC.co analysis · AI-assisted, reviewed against source
Technical summary
The webp decoder lacks proper validation when processing VP8 chunks whose reported dimensions diverge from the canvas dimensions specified in the WebP container. When such a mismatch is encountered during decoding, the parser panics rather than gracefully handling the inconsistency. This causes an immediate crash or unexpected termination of the decoding process. The vulnerability is rooted in insufficient input validation at the VP8 chunk parsing stage.
Business impact
Organizations relying on automated image processing, content management systems, or web applications that decode untrusted WebP images face availability risk. A denial of service condition could disrupt batch image processing pipelines, API endpoints serving thumbnail generation, or any service that processes user-supplied images. Depending on architecture, a crash in a shared decoder library could cascade to dependent services, though the impact is limited to availability rather than confidentiality or integrity.
Affected systems
Any software or library implementing webp decoding is potentially affected. This includes web browsers, image processing libraries, content management systems, and server-side image handling services. Specific affected vendors and products have not been provided in the available data; organizations should check vendor advisories and their own dependencies to confirm exposure. WebP is widely used, so the potential attack surface is broad.
Exploitability
Exploitation is straightforward: an attacker crafts a WebP file with a VP8 chunk containing mismatched dimensions and triggers processing by a vulnerable decoder. No user interaction beyond normal image viewing or processing is required if the application automatically decodes images. The attack vector is network-based and requires no privileges. However, the impact is limited to availability, not confidentiality or integrity. The CVSS score of 7.5 (HIGH) reflects the ease of exploitation combined with the denial of service impact.
Remediation
Apply patches from your webp decoder vendor or library maintainer when available. Verify against vendor advisories for specific version numbers and release dates. Interim mitigations include restricting WebP file uploads, implementing strict file validation before processing, or routing image processing through sandboxed environments to contain crashes. Monitor your image processing services for unexpected crashes or restarts that may signal exploitation attempts.
Patch guidance
Obtain patches from the vendor or maintainer of the webp library or application you use. Patches will likely include dimension validation logic that ensures VP8 chunk dimensions match the container canvas size before attempting decoding. Test patches in a staging environment first, particularly if image processing is critical to your operations. Document the patching timeline and track which internal services depend on the affected decoder.
Detection guidance
Monitor application logs and crash reports for unexpected terminations or panics during image processing operations. Network-based detection is challenging but possible: inspect traffic for WebP files with suspicious or inconsistent dimension metadata, though this requires deep packet inspection. At the host level, watch for unusual restarts or segmentation faults in processes that handle image decoding. Consider implementing file validation rules that reject WebP files with inconsistent chunk metadata before they reach the decoder.
Why prioritize this
While the impact is limited to availability (no data breach risk), the ease of exploitation and the ubiquity of WebP decoding make this a medium-to-high priority. Any organization processing untrusted images—particularly user-generated content—should patch promptly. If image processing is peripheral to core operations, lower the priority; if it is critical to business continuity, treat this as urgent.
Risk score, explained
The CVSS 3.1 score of 7.5 (HIGH) reflects: network-accessible attack vector (AV:N), low attack complexity (AC:L), no privileges required (PR:N), and no user interaction needed (UI:N). The impact is restricted to availability (A:H) with no confidentiality or integrity compromise (C:N/I:N). The score appropriately captures a high-impact denial of service vulnerability that is trivial to exploit but does not lead to data exfiltration or system takeover.
Frequently asked questions
Can this vulnerability be exploited to steal data or gain system access?
No. The vulnerability causes a crash (denial of service) only. It does not allow remote code execution, privilege escalation, or access to sensitive data. The impact is limited to disrupting the availability of image processing services.
Do I need to patch if my application does not process WebP images?
No, if your application does not decode WebP files, you are not exposed to this specific vulnerability. However, if you use a third-party library or framework that transparently handles WebP (or if WebP support is enabled by default), you may be affected indirectly. Verify your application's image format support.
What is the difference between a webp decoder crash and code execution?
A crash terminates the process (denial of service). Code execution allows an attacker to run arbitrary commands on your system. This vulnerability causes only a crash; it is severe for availability but does not grant attackers control of your systems.
How can I test if my decoder is vulnerable?
You can create a test WebP file with mismatched VP8 dimensions and attempt to decode it in a controlled sandbox environment. If the decoder panics or crashes rather than rejecting the file gracefully, it is likely vulnerable. Consult your decoder vendor's security advisories for recommended test cases or patches.
This analysis is based on the CVE description and CVSS vector provided. Specific affected vendors, products, and patch version numbers have not been disclosed in the available data. Organizations must verify their own dependencies against official vendor advisories and security bulletins. The vulnerability details are subject to change as additional information becomes available. This explainer is for informational purposes and does not constitute professional security advice; consult your security team and vendors for guidance specific to your environment. Source: NVD (public-domain), retrieved 2026-08-04. Analysis generated by SEC.co (claude-haiku-4-5).
Related vulnerabilities
- CVE-2016-20062HIGHSQL Injection in Simply Poll 1.4.1 WordPress Plugin - Unauthenticated Data Theft
- CVE-2016-20063HIGHSQL Injection in Single Personal Message 1.0.3 – Credential & Data Theft Risk
- CVE-2016-20065HIGHUnauthenticated SQL Injection in Product Catalog 8 WordPress Plugin
- CVE-2016-20066HIGHWordPress CP Polls 1.0.8 Persistent XSS Vulnerability
- CVE-2016-20068HIGHUnauthenticated SQL Injection in WordPress Booking Calendar Contact Form 1.0.23
- CVE-2016-20069HIGHUnauthenticated SQL Injection in WordPress Booking Calendar Contact Form 1.0.23
- CVE-2016-20071HIGHCritical SQL Injection in WordPress 404 Redirection Manager Plugin v1.0
- CVE-2016-20072HIGHBBS e-Franchise WordPress Plugin SQL Injection – Remote Data Exfiltration Risk