CWE-119
Weakness DiscouragedImproper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer
Abstraction: Class · Status: Stable
The product performs operations on a memory buffer, but it reads from or writes to a memory location outside the buffer's intended boundary.
Dimensions
- Behavior-Type: Restriction of Operations
- Behavior-Property: Improper
- Resource-Type: Memory Buffer
- Resource-Property: within the Bounds
Mapping guidance
CWE-119 is commonly misused in low-information vulnerability reports when lower-level CWEs could be used instead, or when more details about the vulnerability are available.
Look at CWE-119's children and its descendants, which should generally be a better fit. Since this issue is resultant from other weaknesses, conduct root cause analysis to determine the error(s) that led to operations outside of intended buffer boundaries.
Modes of introduction
Detection methods
Automated Static Analysis
This weakness can often be detected using automated static analysis tools. Many modern tools use data flow analysis or constraint-based techniques to minimize the number of false positives.
Automated static analysis generally does not account for environmental considerations when reporting out-of-bounds memory operations. This can make it difficult for users to determine which warnings should be investigated first. For example, an analysis tool might report buffer overflows that originate from command line arguments in a program that is not expected to run with setuid or other special privileges.
Effectiveness: High
Detection techniques for buffer-related errors are more mature than for most other weakness types.
Automated Dynamic Analysis
This weakness can be detected using dynamic tools and techniques that interact with the software using large test suites with many diverse inputs, such as fuzz testing (fuzzing), robustness testing, and fault injection. The software's operation may slow down, but it should not become unstable, crash, or generate incorrect results.
Automated Dynamic Analysis
Use tools that are integrated during compilation to insert runtime error-checking mechanisms related to memory safety errors, such as AddressSanitizer (ASan) for C/C++ [REF-1518].
Effectiveness: Moderate
Crafted inputs are necessary to reach the code containing the error, such as generated by fuzzers. Also, these tools may reduce performance, and they only report the error condition - not the original mistake that led to the error.
Automated Static Analysis - Binary or Bytecode
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:
Cost effective for partial coverage:
Binary / Bytecode Quality Analysis
Bytecode Weakness Analysis - including disassembler + source code weakness analysis
Binary Weakness Analysis - including disassembler + source code weakness analysis
Effectiveness: SOAR Partial
Manual Static Analysis - Binary or Bytecode
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:
Cost effective for partial coverage:
Binary / Bytecode disassembler - then use manual analysis for vulnerabilities & anomalies
Effectiveness: SOAR Partial
Dynamic Analysis with Automated Results Interpretation
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:
Cost effective for partial coverage:
Web Application Scanner
Web Services Scanner
Database Scanners
Effectiveness: SOAR Partial
Dynamic Analysis with Manual Results Interpretation
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:
Cost effective for partial coverage:
Fuzz Tester
Framework-based Fuzzer
Effectiveness: SOAR Partial
Manual Static Analysis - Source Code
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:
Cost effective for partial coverage:
Focused Manual Spotcheck - Focused manual analysis of source
Manual Source Code Review (not inspections)
Effectiveness: SOAR Partial
Automated Static Analysis - Source Code
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:
Highly cost effective:
Source code Weakness Analyzer
Context-configured Source Code Weakness Analyzer
Cost effective for partial coverage:
Source Code Quality Analyzer
Effectiveness: High
Architecture or Design Review
According to SOAR [REF-1479], the following detection techniques may be useful:
Highly cost effective:
Formal Methods / Correct-By-Construction
Cost effective for partial coverage:
Inspection (IEEE 1028 standard) (can apply to requirements, design, source code, etc.)
Effectiveness: High
Notes
Applicable Platform
It is possible in any programming languages without memory management support to attempt an operation outside of the bounds of a memory buffer, but the consequences will vary widely depending on the language, platform, and chip architecture.
Content history
Provided diagram to improve CWE usability
updated Time_of_Introduction
Suggested OWASP Top Ten 2004 mapping
updated Description, Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings
updated Relationships
updated Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings
updated Applicable_Platforms, Common_Consequences, Demonstrative_Examples, Likelihood_of_Exploit, Name, Potential_Mitigations, References, Relationships
updated Potential_Mitigations
updated Demonstrative_Examples
updated Observed_Examples
updated Applicable_Platforms, Common_Consequences, Demonstrative_Examples, Description, Relationships, Time_of_Introduction
updated Common_Consequences, Demonstrative_Examples, Detection_Factors, Observed_Examples
updated Alternate_Terms, Applicable_Platforms, Demonstrative_Examples, Detection_Factors, Potential_Mitigations, References, Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings
updated Potential_Mitigations
updated Potential_Mitigations, Relationships
updated Name
updated Relationships
updated Common_Consequences, Relationships
updated Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings
updated Demonstrative_Examples, Potential_Mitigations, References, Relationships
updated Potential_Mitigations
updated Demonstrative_Examples
updated Potential_Mitigations, References
updated Detection_Factors, Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings
updated Relationships
updated Relationships
updated Relationships
updated Applicable_Platforms, Common_Consequences, Demonstrative_Examples, Observed_Examples, References, Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings
updated References
updated Relationships
updated Related_Attack_Patterns, Relationships
updated References, Relationships
updated Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings, Time_of_Introduction
updated Relationships
updated Alternate_Terms, Relationships
updated Alternate_Terms, Observed_Examples, Relationships
updated Demonstrative_Examples, Observed_Examples, Potential_Mitigations, Relationships
updated Observed_Examples, Relationships
updated Relationships, Taxonomy_Mappings
updated Alternate_Terms, Description
updated Potential_Mitigations, References, Relationships, Time_of_Introduction
updated Mapping_Notes, Relationships
updated Alternate_Terms, Background_Details, Common_Consequences, Description, Diagram
updated Description, Relationships
updated Relationships
updated Demonstrative_Examples, Detection_Factors, Functional_Areas, References
updated Applicable_Platforms, Detection_Factors, References, Weakness_Ordinalities
updated Mapping_Notes, Observed_Examples
updated Common_Consequences, Description, Dimensions, References
18545 vulnerabilities reference this CWE, most recent first.
GHSA-GW87-7X52-74WX
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-08-17 00:00 – Updated: 2022-08-18 00:00OTFCC v0.10.4 was discovered to contain a segmentation violation via /multiarch/memmove-vec-unaligned-erms.S.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2022-35481"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-119"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2022-08-16T21:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "OTFCC v0.10.4 was discovered to contain a segmentation violation via /multiarch/memmove-vec-unaligned-erms.S.",
"id": "GHSA-gw87-7x52-74wx",
"modified": "2022-08-18T00:00:18Z",
"published": "2022-08-17T00:00:20Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2022-35481"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://cvjark.github.io/2022/07/06/CVE-2022-33047"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-GW88-VJJM-8VP4
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2025-05-09 03:30 – Updated: 2025-05-09 03:30A vulnerability was found in D-Link DIR-619L 2.04B04 and classified as critical. Affected by this issue is the function formSetWizard2. The manipulation of the argument curTime leads to buffer overflow. The attack may be launched remotely. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure. This vulnerability only affects products that are no longer supported by the maintainer.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2025-4452"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-119",
"CWE-120"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2025-05-09T02:15:19Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "A vulnerability was found in D-Link DIR-619L 2.04B04 and classified as critical. Affected by this issue is the function formSetWizard2. The manipulation of the argument curTime leads to buffer overflow. The attack may be launched remotely. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure. This vulnerability only affects products that are no longer supported by the maintainer.",
"id": "GHSA-gw88-vjjm-8vp4",
"modified": "2025-05-09T03:30:25Z",
"published": "2025-05-09T03:30:24Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2025-4452"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://github.com/jylsec/vuldb/blob/main/D-Link/dlink_dir619l/Buffer_overflow-formSetWizard2-curTime/README.md"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?ctiid.308066"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?id.308066"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://vuldb.com/?submit.560795"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.dlink.com"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
},
{
"score": "CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X",
"type": "CVSS_V4"
}
]
}
GHSA-GWCQ-G2M6-5993
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 01:05 – Updated: 2025-04-20 03:46ChakraCore and Microsoft Edge in Microsoft Windows 10 Gold, 1511, 1607, 1703, and Windows Server 2016 allows an attacker to execute arbitrary code in the context of the current user, due to how the scripting engine handles objects in memory, aka "Scripting Engine Memory Corruption Vulnerability". This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2017-11792, CVE-2017-11793, CVE-2017-11796, CVE-2017-11797, CVE-2017-11798, CVE-2017-11799, CVE-2017-11800, CVE-2017-11801, CVE-2017-11802, CVE-2017-11804, CVE-2017-11805, CVE-2017-11806, CVE-2017-11807, CVE-2017-11808, CVE-2017-11809, CVE-2017-11810, CVE-2017-11812, and CVE-2017-11821.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2017-11811"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-119"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2017-10-13T13:29:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "ChakraCore and Microsoft Edge in Microsoft Windows 10 Gold, 1511, 1607, 1703, and Windows Server 2016 allows an attacker to execute arbitrary code in the context of the current user, due to how the scripting engine handles objects in memory, aka \"Scripting Engine Memory Corruption Vulnerability\". This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2017-11792, CVE-2017-11793, CVE-2017-11796, CVE-2017-11797, CVE-2017-11798, CVE-2017-11799, CVE-2017-11800, CVE-2017-11801, CVE-2017-11802, CVE-2017-11804, CVE-2017-11805, CVE-2017-11806, CVE-2017-11807, CVE-2017-11808, CVE-2017-11809, CVE-2017-11810, CVE-2017-11812, and CVE-2017-11821.",
"id": "GHSA-gwcq-g2m6-5993",
"modified": "2025-04-20T03:46:44Z",
"published": "2022-05-14T01:05:31Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2017-11811"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://portal.msrc.microsoft.com/en-US/security-guidance/advisory/CVE-2017-11811"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.exploit-db.com/exploits/43152"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/101138"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securitytracker.com/id/1039529"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-GWF9-PCHJ-C755
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 03:43 – Updated: 2022-05-14 03:43An issue was discovered in Extreme Networks ExtremeWireless WiNG 5.x before 5.8.6.9 and 5.9.x before 5.9.1.3. There is a Hidden Root Shell by entering the administrator password in conjunction with the 'service start-shell' CLI command.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2018-5796"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-119"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2018-02-05T04:29:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "An issue was discovered in Extreme Networks ExtremeWireless WiNG 5.x before 5.8.6.9 and 5.9.x before 5.9.1.3. There is a Hidden Root Shell by entering the administrator password in conjunction with the \u0027service start-shell\u0027 CLI command.",
"id": "GHSA-gwf9-pchj-c755",
"modified": "2022-05-14T03:43:39Z",
"published": "2022-05-14T03:43:39Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2018-5796"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://gtacknowledge.extremenetworks.com/articles/Vulnerability_Notice/VN-2018-003"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:H/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-GWFC-JMFJ-45PC
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-24 17:27 – Updated: 2022-05-24 17:27A memory corruption vulnerability exists in InDesign 15.1.1 (and earlier versions). Insecure handling of a malicious indd file could be abused to cause an out-of-bounds memory access, potentially resulting in code execution in the context of the current user.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2020-9729"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-119",
"CWE-787"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2020-09-10T19:15:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "A memory corruption vulnerability exists in InDesign 15.1.1 (and earlier versions). Insecure handling of a malicious indd file could be abused to cause an out-of-bounds memory access, potentially resulting in code execution in the context of the current user.",
"id": "GHSA-gwfc-jmfj-45pc",
"modified": "2022-05-24T17:27:51Z",
"published": "2022-05-24T17:27:51Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2020-9729"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://helpx.adobe.com/security/products/indesign/apsb20-52.html"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-GWFG-W653-2WXX
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-14 03:24 – Updated: 2022-05-14 03:24In Android before 2018-04-05 or earlier security patch level on Qualcomm Snapdragon Mobile and Snapdragon Wear IPQ4019, MDM9206, MDM9607, MDM9625, MDM9635M, MSM8909W, SD 210/SD 212/SD 205, SD 400, SD 410/12, SD 600, SD 615/16/SD 415, SD 617, SD 650/52, SD 800, SD 808, and SD 810, in widevine_dash_cmd_handler(), rsp buffers are passed off to widevine commands. These rsp buffers have values in them, such as buffer lengths, that need to be validated to ensure that no buffer overflow/over-reads happen. However, rsp buffers are not always in locked memory, meaning a time-of-check, time-of-use issue can occur where we check that the value is valid, but then a race condition occurs where this memory is swapped out with a different, possibly out of range, value.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2015-9157"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-119"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2018-04-18T14:29:00Z",
"severity": "CRITICAL"
},
"details": "In Android before 2018-04-05 or earlier security patch level on Qualcomm Snapdragon Mobile and Snapdragon Wear IPQ4019, MDM9206, MDM9607, MDM9625, MDM9635M, MSM8909W, SD 210/SD 212/SD 205, SD 400, SD 410/12, SD 600, SD 615/16/SD 415, SD 617, SD 650/52, SD 800, SD 808, and SD 810, in widevine_dash_cmd_handler(), rsp buffers are passed off to widevine commands. These rsp buffers have values in them, such as buffer lengths, that need to be validated to ensure that no buffer overflow/over-reads happen. However, rsp buffers are not always in locked memory, meaning a time-of-check, time-of-use issue can occur where we check that the value is valid, but then a race condition occurs where this memory is swapped out with a different, possibly out of range, value.",
"id": "GHSA-gwfg-w653-2wxx",
"modified": "2022-05-14T03:24:56Z",
"published": "2022-05-14T03:24:56Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2015-9157"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://source.android.com/security/bulletin/2018-04-01"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/103671"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-GWFV-2HFV-WQMR
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 01:44 – Updated: 2022-05-17 01:44The (1) otrl_base64_otr_decode function in src/b64.c; (2) otrl_proto_data_read_flags and (3) otrl_proto_accept_data functions in src/proto.c; and (4) decode function in toolkit/parse.c in libotr before 3.2.1 allocates a zero-length buffer when decoding a base64 string, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (application crash) via a message with the value "?OTR:===.", which triggers a heap-based buffer overflow.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2012-3461"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-119"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2012-08-20T19:55:00Z",
"severity": "MODERATE"
},
"details": "The (1) otrl_base64_otr_decode function in src/b64.c; (2) otrl_proto_data_read_flags and (3) otrl_proto_accept_data functions in src/proto.c; and (4) decode function in toolkit/parse.c in libotr before 3.2.1 allocates a zero-length buffer when decoding a base64 string, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (application crash) via a message with the value \"?OTR:===.\", which triggers a heap-based buffer overflow.",
"id": "GHSA-gwfv-2hfv-wqmr",
"modified": "2022-05-17T01:44:00Z",
"published": "2022-05-17T01:44:00Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2012-3461"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=846377"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/77528"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=684121"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://lists.cypherpunks.ca/pipermail/otr-dev/2012-July/001347.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://lists.cypherpunks.ca/pipermail/otr-dev/2012-July/001348.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2012-11/msg00016.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2012-11/msg00019.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-security-announce/2013-01/msg00019.html"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://otr.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=otr/libotr%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=1902baee5d4b056850274ed0fa8c2409f1187435"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://otr.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=otr/libotr%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=6d4ca89cf1d3c9a8aff696c3a846ac5a51f762c1"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://otr.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=otr/libotr%3Ba=commitdiff%3Bh=b17232f86f8e60d0d22caf9a2400494d3c77da58"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://otr.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=otr/libotr;a=commitdiff;h=1902baee5d4b056850274ed0fa8c2409f1187435"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://otr.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=otr/libotr;a=commitdiff;h=6d4ca89cf1d3c9a8aff696c3a846ac5a51f762c1"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://otr.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=otr/libotr;a=commitdiff;h=b17232f86f8e60d0d22caf9a2400494d3c77da58"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.debian.org/security/2012/dsa-2526"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.mandriva.com/security/advisories?name=MDVSA-2012:131"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.mandriva.com/security/advisories?name=MDVSA-2013:097"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/54907"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.ubuntu.com/usn/USN-1541-1"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-GWFV-7RCQ-HXCC
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-01 17:41 – Updated: 2025-04-09 03:36Stack-based buffer overflow in the NCTAudioFile2.AudioFile ActiveX control (NCTAudioFile2.dll), as used by multiple products, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a long argument to the SetFormatLikeSample function. NOTE: the products include (1) NCTsoft NCTAudioStudio, NCTAudioEditor, and NCTDialogicVoice; (2) Magic Audio Recorder, Music Editor, and Audio Converter; (3) Aurora Media Workshop; DB Audio Mixer And Editor; (4) J. Hepple Products including Fx Audio Editor and others; (5) EXPStudio Audio Editor; (6) iMesh; (7) Quikscribe; (8) RMBSoft AudioConvert and SoundEdit Pro 2.1; (9) CDBurnerXP; (10) Code-it Software Wave MP3 Editor and aBasic Editor; (11) Movavi VideoMessage, DVD to iPod, and others; (12) SoftDiv Software Dexster, iVideoMAX, and others; (13) Sienzo Digital Music Mentor (DMM); (14) MP3 Normalizer; (15) Roemer Software FREE and Easy Hi-Q Recorder, and Easy Hi-Q Converter; (16) Audio Edit Magic; (17) Joshua Video and Audio Converter; (18) Virtual CD; (19) Cheetah CD and DVD Burner; (20) Mystik Media AudioEdit Deluxe, Blaze Media, and others; (21) Power Audio Editor; (22) DanDans Digital Media Full Audio Converter, Music Editing Master, and others; (23) Xrlly Software Text to Speech Makerand Arial Sound Recorder / Audio Converter; (24) Absolute Sound Recorder, Video to Audio Converter, and MP3 Splitter; (25) Easy Ringtone Maker; (26) RecordNRip; (27) McFunSoft iPod Audio Studio, Audio Recorder for Free, and others; (28) MP3 WAV Converter; (29) BearShare 6.0.2.26789; and (30) Oracle Siebel SimBuilder and CRM 7.x.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2007-0018"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-119"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2007-01-24T21:28:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Stack-based buffer overflow in the NCTAudioFile2.AudioFile ActiveX control (NCTAudioFile2.dll), as used by multiple products, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a long argument to the SetFormatLikeSample function. NOTE: the products include (1) NCTsoft NCTAudioStudio, NCTAudioEditor, and NCTDialogicVoice; (2) Magic Audio Recorder, Music Editor, and Audio Converter; (3) Aurora Media Workshop; DB Audio Mixer And Editor; (4) J. Hepple Products including Fx Audio Editor and others; (5) EXPStudio Audio Editor; (6) iMesh; (7) Quikscribe; (8) RMBSoft AudioConvert and SoundEdit Pro 2.1; (9) CDBurnerXP; (10) Code-it Software Wave MP3 Editor and aBasic Editor; (11) Movavi VideoMessage, DVD to iPod, and others; (12) SoftDiv Software Dexster, iVideoMAX, and others; (13) Sienzo Digital Music Mentor (DMM); (14) MP3 Normalizer; (15) Roemer Software FREE and Easy Hi-Q Recorder, and Easy Hi-Q Converter; (16) Audio Edit Magic; (17) Joshua Video and Audio Converter; (18) Virtual CD; (19) Cheetah CD and DVD Burner; (20) Mystik Media AudioEdit Deluxe, Blaze Media, and others; (21) Power Audio Editor; (22) DanDans Digital Media Full Audio Converter, Music Editing Master, and others; (23) Xrlly Software Text to Speech Makerand Arial Sound Recorder / Audio Converter; (24) Absolute Sound Recorder, Video to Audio Converter, and MP3 Splitter; (25) Easy Ringtone Maker; (26) RecordNRip; (27) McFunSoft iPod Audio Studio, Audio Recorder for Free, and others; (28) MP3 WAV Converter; (29) BearShare 6.0.2.26789; and (30) Oracle Siebel SimBuilder and CRM 7.x.",
"id": "GHSA-gwfv-7rcq-hxcc",
"modified": "2025-04-09T03:36:35Z",
"published": "2022-05-01T17:41:21Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2007-0018"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/31707"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/22922"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23475"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23485"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23493"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23495"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23511"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23516"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23530"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23532"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23534"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23535"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23536"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23541"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23542"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23543"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23544"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23546"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23548"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23550"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23551"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23552"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23553"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23554"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23557"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23558"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23560"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23561"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23562"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23565"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23568"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23745"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23753"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/23795"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/25993"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/26046"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/26100"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/26101"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/28407"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/30406"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/30424"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/30439"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/30446"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/30447"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/30450"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/advisories/30459"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/blog/6"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-10/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-11/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-12/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-13/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-14/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-15/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-16/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-17/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-18/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-19/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-2/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-20/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-21/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-22/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-23/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-24/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-25/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-26/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-27/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-28/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-29/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-3/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-30/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-31/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-32/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-33/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-34/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-4/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-5/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-50/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-6/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-7/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-8/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://secunia.com/secunia_research/2007-9/advisory"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/292713"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/457936/100/200/threaded"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/457940/100/200/threaded"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/1/457965/100/200/threaded"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/22196"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/23892"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.vupen.com/english/advisories/2007/0310"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": []
}
GHSA-GWFW-6J5C-M8HW
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2022-05-17 00:32 – Updated: 2022-05-17 00:32Stack-based buffer overflow in nvhost_job.c in the NVIDIA video driver for Android, Shield TV before OTA 3.3, Shield Table before OTA 4.4, and Shield Table TK1 before OTA 1.5.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2016-6915"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-119"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2017-04-24T20:59:00Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "Stack-based buffer overflow in nvhost_job.c in the NVIDIA video driver for Android, Shield TV before OTA 3.3, Shield Table before OTA 4.4, and Shield Table TK1 before OTA 1.5.",
"id": "GHSA-gwfw-6j5c-m8hw",
"modified": "2022-05-17T00:32:35Z",
"published": "2022-05-17T00:32:35Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2016-6915"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://source.android.com/security/bulletin/2016-12-01"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://nvidia.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/4276/~/security-bulletin%3A-nvidia-shield-contains-multiple-vulnerabilities-in"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://nvidia.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/4561"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/94667"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
GHSA-GWGM-RVH4-63C2
Vulnerability from github – Published: 2024-06-25 03:31 – Updated: 2024-07-03 18:46A maliciously crafted CATPART, X_B and STEP, when parsed in ASMKERN228A.dll and ASMKERN229A.dll through Autodesk applications, can lead to a memory corruption vulnerability by write access violation. This vulnerability, in conjunction with other vulnerabilities, can lead to code execution in the context of the current process.
{
"affected": [],
"aliases": [
"CVE-2024-23147"
],
"database_specific": {
"cwe_ids": [
"CWE-119",
"CWE-787"
],
"github_reviewed": false,
"github_reviewed_at": null,
"nvd_published_at": "2024-06-25T03:15:10Z",
"severity": "HIGH"
},
"details": "A maliciously crafted CATPART, X_B and STEP, when parsed in ASMKERN228A.dll and ASMKERN229A.dll through Autodesk applications, can lead to a memory corruption vulnerability by write access violation. This vulnerability, in conjunction with other vulnerabilities, can lead to code execution in the context of the current process.",
"id": "GHSA-gwgm-rvh4-63c2",
"modified": "2024-07-03T18:46:47Z",
"published": "2024-06-25T03:31:07Z",
"references": [
{
"type": "ADVISORY",
"url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2024-23147"
},
{
"type": "WEB",
"url": "https://www.autodesk.com/trust/security-advisories/adsk-sa-2024-0009"
}
],
"schema_version": "1.4.0",
"severity": [
{
"score": "CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H",
"type": "CVSS_V3"
}
]
}
Mitigation MIT-3
Strategy: Language Selection
- Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
- For example, many languages that perform their own memory management, such as Java and Perl, are not subject to buffer overflows. Other languages, such as Ada and C#, typically provide overflow protection, but the protection can be disabled by the programmer.
- Be wary that a language's interface to native code may still be subject to overflows, even if the language itself is theoretically safe.
Mitigation MIT-4.1
Strategy: Libraries or Frameworks
- Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
- Examples include the Safe C String Library (SafeStr) by Messier and Viega [REF-57], and the Strsafe.h library from Microsoft [REF-56]. These libraries provide safer versions of overflow-prone string-handling functions.
Mitigation MIT-10
Strategy: Environment Hardening
- Use automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index checking.
- D3-SFCV (Stack Frame Canary Validation) from D3FEND [REF-1334] discusses canary-based detection in detail.
Mitigation MIT-9
- Consider adhering to the following rules when allocating and managing an application's memory:
- Double check that the buffer is as large as specified.
- When using functions that accept a number of bytes to copy, such as strncpy(), be aware that if the destination buffer size is equal to the source buffer size, it may not NULL-terminate the string.
- Check buffer boundaries if accessing the buffer in a loop and make sure there is no danger of writing past the allocated space.
- If necessary, truncate all input strings to a reasonable length before passing them to the copy and concatenation functions.
Mitigation MIT-11
Strategy: Environment Hardening
- Run or compile the software using features or extensions that randomly arrange the positions of a program's executable and libraries in memory. Because this makes the addresses unpredictable, it can prevent an attacker from reliably jumping to exploitable code.
- Examples include Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR) [REF-58] [REF-60] and Position-Independent Executables (PIE) [REF-64]. Imported modules may be similarly realigned if their default memory addresses conflict with other modules, in a process known as "rebasing" (for Windows) and "prelinking" (for Linux) [REF-1332] using randomly generated addresses. ASLR for libraries cannot be used in conjunction with prelink since it would require relocating the libraries at run-time, defeating the whole purpose of prelinking.
- For more information on these techniques see D3-SAOR (Segment Address Offset Randomization) from D3FEND [REF-1335].
Mitigation MIT-12
Strategy: Environment Hardening
- Use a CPU and operating system that offers Data Execution Protection (using hardware NX or XD bits) or the equivalent techniques that simulate this feature in software, such as PaX [REF-60] [REF-61]. These techniques ensure that any instruction executed is exclusively at a memory address that is part of the code segment.
- For more information on these techniques see D3-PSEP (Process Segment Execution Prevention) from D3FEND [REF-1336].
Mitigation MIT-13
Replace unbounded copy functions with analogous functions that support length arguments, such as strcpy with strncpy. Create these if they are not available.
CAPEC-10: Buffer Overflow via Environment Variables
This attack pattern involves causing a buffer overflow through manipulation of environment variables. Once the adversary finds that they can modify an environment variable, they may try to overflow associated buffers. This attack leverages implicit trust often placed in environment variables.
CAPEC-100: Overflow Buffers
Buffer Overflow attacks target improper or missing bounds checking on buffer operations, typically triggered by input injected by an adversary. As a consequence, an adversary is able to write past the boundaries of allocated buffer regions in memory, causing a program crash or potentially redirection of execution as per the adversaries' choice.
CAPEC-123: Buffer Manipulation
An adversary manipulates an application's interaction with a buffer in an attempt to read or modify data they shouldn't have access to. Buffer attacks are distinguished in that it is the buffer space itself that is the target of the attack rather than any code responsible for interpreting the content of the buffer. In virtually all buffer attacks the content that is placed in the buffer is immaterial. Instead, most buffer attacks involve retrieving or providing more input than can be stored in the allocated buffer, resulting in the reading or overwriting of other unintended program memory.
CAPEC-14: Client-side Injection-induced Buffer Overflow
This type of attack exploits a buffer overflow vulnerability in targeted client software through injection of malicious content from a custom-built hostile service. This hostile service is created to deliver the correct content to the client software. For example, if the client-side application is a browser, the service will host a webpage that the browser loads.
CAPEC-24: Filter Failure through Buffer Overflow
In this attack, the idea is to cause an active filter to fail by causing an oversized transaction. An attacker may try to feed overly long input strings to the program in an attempt to overwhelm the filter (by causing a buffer overflow) and hoping that the filter does not fail securely (i.e. the user input is let into the system unfiltered).
CAPEC-42: MIME Conversion
An attacker exploits a weakness in the MIME conversion routine to cause a buffer overflow and gain control over the mail server machine. The MIME system is designed to allow various different information formats to be interpreted and sent via e-mail. Attack points exist when data are converted to MIME compatible format and back.
CAPEC-44: Overflow Binary Resource File
An attack of this type exploits a buffer overflow vulnerability in the handling of binary resources. Binary resources may include music files like MP3, image files like JPEG files, and any other binary file. These attacks may pass unnoticed to the client machine through normal usage of files, such as a browser loading a seemingly innocent JPEG file. This can allow the adversary access to the execution stack and execute arbitrary code in the target process.
CAPEC-45: Buffer Overflow via Symbolic Links
This type of attack leverages the use of symbolic links to cause buffer overflows. An adversary can try to create or manipulate a symbolic link file such that its contents result in out of bounds data. When the target software processes the symbolic link file, it could potentially overflow internal buffers with insufficient bounds checking.
CAPEC-46: Overflow Variables and Tags
This type of attack leverages the use of tags or variables from a formatted configuration data to cause buffer overflow. The adversary crafts a malicious HTML page or configuration file that includes oversized strings, thus causing an overflow.
CAPEC-47: Buffer Overflow via Parameter Expansion
In this attack, the target software is given input that the adversary knows will be modified and expanded in size during processing. This attack relies on the target software failing to anticipate that the expanded data may exceed some internal limit, thereby creating a buffer overflow.
CAPEC-8: Buffer Overflow in an API Call
This attack targets libraries or shared code modules which are vulnerable to buffer overflow attacks. An adversary who has knowledge of known vulnerable libraries or shared code can easily target software that makes use of these libraries. All clients that make use of the code library thus become vulnerable by association. This has a very broad effect on security across a system, usually affecting more than one software process.
CAPEC-9: Buffer Overflow in Local Command-Line Utilities
This attack targets command-line utilities available in a number of shells. An adversary can leverage a vulnerability found in a command-line utility to escalate privilege to root.