ghsa-9pvj-32x2-9jrc
Vulnerability from github
Published
2022-05-13 01:05
Modified
2022-05-13 01:05
Details
Buffer overflow in ngx_http_mp4_module.c in the ngx_http_mp4_module module in nginx 1.0.7 through 1.0.14 and 1.1.3 through 1.1.18, when the mp4 directive is used, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory overwrite) or possibly execute arbitrary code via a crafted MP4 file.
{ affected: [], aliases: [ "CVE-2012-2089", ], database_specific: { cwe_ids: [ "CWE-120", ], github_reviewed: false, github_reviewed_at: null, nvd_published_at: "2012-04-17T21:55:00Z", severity: "MODERATE", }, details: "Buffer overflow in ngx_http_mp4_module.c in the ngx_http_mp4_module module in nginx 1.0.7 through 1.0.14 and 1.1.3 through 1.1.18, when the mp4 directive is used, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory overwrite) or possibly execute arbitrary code via a crafted MP4 file.", id: "GHSA-9pvj-32x2-9jrc", modified: "2022-05-13T01:05:17Z", published: "2022-05-13T01:05:17Z", references: [ { type: "ADVISORY", url: "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2012-2089", }, { type: "WEB", url: "https://exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com/vulnerabilities/74831", }, { type: "WEB", url: "http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/package-announce/2012-April/079388.html", }, { type: "WEB", url: "http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/package-announce/2012-May/079467.html", }, { type: "WEB", url: "http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/package-announce/2012-May/079474.html", }, { type: "WEB", url: "http://nginx.org/en/security_advisories.html", }, { type: "WEB", url: "http://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2012/04/12/9", }, { type: "WEB", url: "http://www.securityfocus.com/bid/52999", }, { type: "WEB", url: "http://www.securitytracker.com/id?1026924", }, ], schema_version: "1.4.0", severity: [], }
Log in or create an account to share your comment.
Security Advisory comment format.
This schema specifies the format of a comment related to a security advisory.
Title of the comment
Description of the comment
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Sightings
Author | Source | Type | Date |
---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
- Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.