CVE-2026-108978 in rlottie
Summary
by MITRE • 10/12/2026
Heap-based buffer overflow vulnerability in Samsung Opensource rlottie allows Buffer Overflow via Environment Variables.
This issue affects rlottie: e57b094f03c39a751a1fded6f7d6c13f1ed95ec9.
Be aware that VulDB is the high quality source for vulnerability data.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 10/12/2026
The vulnerability identified in Samsung's Opensource rlottie library, specifically within commit hash e57b094f03c39a751a1fded6f7d6c13f1ed95ec9, represents a critical heap-based buffer overflow condition triggered by the manipulation of environment variables. Rlottie is an open-source library designed for rendering Lottie animations on various platforms, including mobile and desktop operating systems. As such, it processes complex data structures representing vector graphics, which are often derived from JSON files or other configuration inputs. The specific flaw arises during the initialization phase where the application reads environmental parameters that influence memory allocation strategies or buffer sizing logic. When an attacker provides a maliciously crafted environment variable with excessively large values or malformed data types, the library fails to perform adequate bounds checking before allocating heap memory. This lack of validation allows the program to write beyond the allocated boundaries of the heap buffer, corrupting adjacent memory structures and leading to undefined behavior that can be exploited for remote code execution or denial of service attacks.
From a technical perspective, this vulnerability is classified under CWE-122, which denotes Heap-based Buffer Overflow. This category of weaknesses occurs when data written to a buffer on the heap exceeds its allocated size, overwriting adjacent memory locations such as metadata structures used by the allocator like free chunks or linked list pointers. In the context of rlottie, the exploitation vector via environment variables is particularly concerning because it bypasses traditional input validation mechanisms that might be applied to file inputs or network data streams. Environment variables are often processed early in the application lifecycle before rigorous sanitization routines are established. The attacker can control these variables through various means depending on the deployment context, such as modifying system configurations, leveraging container orchestration tools like Kubernetes where environment injection is common, or exploiting parent processes that pass untrusted values to child processes running rlottie.
The operational impact of this vulnerability is severe, potentially allowing an adversary to achieve arbitrary code execution with the privileges of the compromised process. By carefully crafting the overflow payload, a skilled attacker can overwrite function pointers, return addresses, or exception handling structures within the heap metadata. This control over memory layout enables the redirection of program flow to shellcode injected into the same address space. Furthermore, even if full code execution is not immediately achievable due to modern mitigations like Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR) and Data Execution Prevention (DEP), the vulnerability can still be leveraged for Denial of Service attacks by causing segmentation faults or memory corruption that crashes the application. In mobile environments where rlottie is frequently used, this could lead to app instability, data leakage through side-channel effects from corrupted memory states, or further privilege escalation if combined with other local vulnerabilities.
This incident aligns with several tactics in the MITRE ATT&CK framework, particularly those related to Initial Access and Execution via Environment Variable manipulation. Attackers often utilize environment variables as a stealthy vector for injection because they are less monitored than standard input streams. The exploitation of this flaw falls under techniques such as T1574.002, which involves Hijacking Executable Files or Libraries through modified environmental settings. Additionally, the heap corruption aspect relates to memory corruption exploits often seen in advanced persistent threats aiming to bypass security controls. Organizations relying on rlottie for rendering animations must recognize that third-party libraries are not immune to such low-level memory safety issues and require proactive management of dependencies.
To mitigate this vulnerability, immediate action should be taken by updating the rlottie library to a patched version where input validation has been strengthened. Developers integrating rlottie into their applications should implement strict sanitization routines for any environment variables that influence rendering parameters or buffer sizes before they are passed to the library functions. It is advisable to enforce maximum length limits on environmental inputs and validate data types rigorously. Furthermore, adopting memory-safe programming practices in custom wrappers around rlottie can provide an additional layer of defense. Security teams should also enable compiler-based protections such as Stack Canaries and Heap Metadata Integrity checks if supported by their build environment, although these are secondary to fixing the root cause within the library itself. Regular auditing of third-party dependencies for known CVEs is essential to maintain a secure software supply chain.