Orangelab's vulnerability footprint centers on its ImageMagick engine product, a narrowly scoped offering that handles image processing across web and application contexts. The observed weakness classes—cross-site request forgery, untrusted deserialization, and OS command injection—reflect input-handling and execution-control risks inherent to image processing and web-facing service boundaries; live severity, exploitation, and exposure counts are shown alongside this summary.
The number and severity of CVEs published that impact products developed by Orangelab over time
Signals from CVEs in this vendor scope (3 CVEs).
3 CVEs · Highest risk first
| CVE | Published | CVSS | Risk | KEV | Exploit |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CVE-2022-2441HIGH The ImageMagick Engine plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to remote code execution via the 'cli_path' parameter in versions up to, and including 1.7.5. This makes it possible for u | Oct 20, 2023 | 8.8 | 28 | NO | NO |
CVE-2022-3568HIGH The ImageMagick Engine plugin for WordPress is vulnerable to deserialization of untrusted input via the 'cli_path' parameter in versions up to, and including 1.7.5. This makes it p | Feb 10, 2023 | 8.8 | 22 | NO | NO |
CVE-2024-6486HIGH The ImageMagick Engine ImageMagick Engine WordPress plugin before 1.7.11 for WordPress is vulnerable to OS Command Injection via the "cli_path" parameter. This allows authenticated | May 15, 2025 | 7.2 | 21 | NO | NO |
Signals from CVEs in this vendor scope (3 CVEs).
An overview of all social media posts that mention a CVE ID that affects a product developed by Orangelab.
Media articles that mention a CVE ID that affects a product developed by Orangelab — matched by CVE ID, not by vendor name.