Vigilbase CVEConnect your agent

SQLite sqlite

Not in CISA KEVCVE-2025-3277CWE-122

Not confirmed exploited. 1 of 8 rule sources name it.

Edge rules
1/8
Our test
No exploit yet
CVSS
6.9
EPSS
1.3% Top 31%
Posts, 14d
02026-10-21: 0 posts2026-10-22: 0 posts2026-10-23: 0 posts2026-10-24: 0 posts2026-10-25: 0 posts2026-10-26: 0 posts2026-10-27: 0 posts2026-10-28: 0 posts2026-10-29: 0 posts2026-10-30: 0 posts2026-10-31: 0 posts2026-11-01: 0 posts2026-11-02: 0 posts2026-11-03: 0 posts
Published
2025-04-14
An integer overflow can be triggered in SQLite’s `concat_ws()` function. The resulting, truncated integer is then used to allocate a buffer. When SQLite then writes the resulting string to the buffer, it uses the original, untruncated size… More

An integer overflow can be triggered in SQLite’s `concat_ws()` function. The resulting, truncated integer is then used to allocate a buffer. When SQLite then writes the resulting string to the buffer, it uses the original, untruncated size and thus a wild Heap Buffer overflow of size ~4GB can be triggered. This can result in arbitrary code execution.

Ask Vigil

AI · answers from this page
Ask about CVE-2025-3277: who's covered, what to patch first, how vendors compare. I cite sources and won't help with attacks.

Workers AI (Llama 3.3). Can be wrong: check the cited source.

Severity, decoded

CVSS 4.0
Medium · 6.9 / 10

Exploitable over the network, with no privileges and no user interaction, leading to low impact on confidentiality, integrity and availability; other systems can also be hit (low impact on confidentiality, integrity and availability).

Over the internetNo login neededNo user actionWorks reliably
How the score is built11 metrics
  • Attack vectorAn attacker can reach it over the internet; no access to your network needed.
    Network
  • Attack complexityNo built-in defences have to be bypassed; the attack works reliably.
    Low
  • Attack requirementsThe attack works without any special deployment or timing conditions.
    None
  • Privileges requiredNo account or login is needed.
    None
  • User interactionNo one has to click or open anything; the attack works on its own.
    None
  • Confidentiality impact (vulnerable system)An attacker can read some data, but has no control over what they get.
    Low
  • Integrity impact (vulnerable system)An attacker can change some data, but with limited control or limited effect.
    Low
  • Availability impact (vulnerable system)An attacker can slow the component down or interrupt it now and then.
    Low
  • Confidentiality impact (other systems)Other systems that rely on it can have some data read.
    Low
  • Integrity impact (other systems)Other systems that rely on it can have some data changed.
    Low
  • Availability impact (other systems)Other systems that rely on it can be slowed down or interrupted.
    Low
CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:L/SI:L/SA:L
CISA's assessmentSSVC, from the CVE record
ExploitationNone

CISA has seen no public exploit and no attacks.

AutomatableNo

At least one step needs hands-on work, which slows mass attacks.

Technical impactPartial

A successful attack gives limited control over the affected software or limited access to its data.

Public exploits

None found
0 Metasploit0 Exploit-DB0 Scanner template0 GitHub PoCs

No exploit in Exploit-DB or Metasploit, and no scanner template. That lowers, but doesn't remove, the chance of mass exploitation.

Timeline

  1. 2025-04-14
    CVE published
    CVE List
  2. 2025-06-30
    F5 ships a rule
    SQLite concat_ws Integer Overflow (Parameter)

Social

2026-10-21: 0 posts2026-10-22: 0 posts2026-10-23: 0 posts2026-10-24: 0 posts2026-10-25: 0 posts2026-10-26: 0 posts2026-10-27: 0 posts2026-10-28: 0 posts2026-10-29: 0 posts2026-10-30: 0 posts2026-10-31: 0 posts2026-11-01: 0 posts2026-11-02: 0 posts2026-11-03: 0 posts

No posts seen yet on X, Bluesky, Mastodon, Hacker News or GitHub.

Vendor statements

Quoted
CloudflareWAF Managed RulesNo public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. Each row gives the rule ID and its default action. The feed starts in January 2025, so older rules are missing.

AWSAWS WAF Managed RulesNo public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. AWS often describes a vulnerability without naming its CVE (for example "Log4j"). We count only entries that name the CVE, so AWS coverage is understated.

Microsoft AzureFront Door and Application Gateway WAF (DRS)No public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. The rule tables name CVEs but carry no dates, so Azure is left out of every time-to-rule figure.

Google CloudCloud Armor preconfigured WAF rulesNo public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. Google names few CVEs: the release notes start in May 2024 and the rules reference lists CVEs without dates. Its cve-canary rules are opt-in.

FastlyNext-Gen WAF virtual patchesBefore feed history

The CVE predates the oldest entry in this vendor's public feed, so a rule may exist that we cannot see.

F5Attack signatures (Distributed Cloud WAF)3 quotesRule published

First rule 2025-06-30, 77 days after the CVE was published.

2025-06-30New rule200011101Source
Added: signature 200011101 "SQLite concat_ws Integer Overflow (Parameter)" (Buffer Overflow, risk Low), systems: SQLite. References: CVE-2025-3277, CVE-2025-29087.
2025-06-30New rule200011102Source
Added: signature 200011102 "SQLite concat_ws Integer Overflow (Header)" (Buffer Overflow, risk Low), systems: SQLite. References: CVE-2025-3277, CVE-2025-29087.
2025-06-30New rule200011103Source
Added: signature 200011103 "SQLite concat_ws Integer Overflow (URI)" (Buffer Overflow, risk Low), systems: SQLite. References: CVE-2025-3277, CVE-2025-29087.
AkamaiApp & API Protector (Adaptive Security Engine)No public source

This vendor publishes no machine-readable rule changelog we can check.

OWASP CRSCore Rule Set (open source, used inside many WAFs)No public claim

We found no public statement from this vendor naming this CVE. That is not proof of no protection: generic rules may still catch it. CRS rarely names CVEs: it relies on generic detections. Our own lab measures what it actually blocks.