Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2012-2034 is a high-severity Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer (CWE-119) vulnerability in Adobe Flash Player. Its CVSS base score is 7.5 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Process Injection (T1055); ranked in the top 6% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; CISA has added it to the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
Adobe Flash Player versions prior to 10.3.183.20 and 11.x prior to 11.3.300.257 on Windows and Mac OS X, prior to 10.3.183.20 and 11.x prior to 11.2.202.236 on Linux, prior to 11.1.111.10 on Android 2.x and 3.x, and prior to 11.1.115.9 on Android 4.x, along with Adobe AIR before 3.3.0.3610, contain a memory corruption flaw tracked as CWE-119. The issue permits arbitrary code execution or denial of service through unspecified vectors and is distinct from CVE-2012-2037. It carries a CVSS 3.1 score of 7.5 reflecting network attack complexity and high impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability.
An unauthenticated remote attacker can deliver malicious Flash content via a web browser or AIR application to trigger the flaw. Successful exploitation grants the ability to execute arbitrary code in the context of the affected process or to crash the Flash runtime, potentially leading to system compromise on the target platform.
Adobe security bulletin APSB12-14 and corresponding vendor advisories from Red Hat and openSUSE direct users to apply the updated Flash Player and AIR releases that remediate the vulnerability. Organizations should prioritize installation of these patches across all supported operating systems to eliminate exposure.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2012-2040
Vulnerability Data
Adobe Flash Player before 10.3.183.20 and 11.x before 11.3.300.257 on Windows and Mac OS X; before 10.3.183.20 and 11.x before 11.2.202.236 on Linux; before 11.1.111.10 on Android 2.x and 3.x; and before 11.1.115.9 on Android 4.x, and Adobe AIR before…
more
3.3.0.3610, allows attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service (memory corruption) via unspecified vectors, a different vulnerability than CVE-2012-2037.
- CWE(s)
- KEV Date Added
- 28 March 2022
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V17.3.2
Likely Mitigating Controls AI
Per-CVE control mapping for this CVE has not run yet; the list below is derived from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry.
Ongoing control assessments and code testing (static/dynamic analysis, fuzzing) surface memory buffer restriction failures, which are then remediated before release.
Managed runtimes used by platform-independent applications (e.g., JVM, CLR) enforce memory safety, preventing most buffer overflows that require direct memory manipulation.
Memory protections (e.g., W^X, ASLR) make exploitation of buffer-boundary violations far harder to turn into code execution.
Detects exploitation attempts that produce memory corruption, crashes, or anomalous behavior.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Secure SDLC practices (bounds checking, safe APIs, reviews) directly prevent this class of flaw.
Vulnerability scanning and code analysis directly surface buffer-boundary flaws.
Receiving and triaging vulnerability disclosures commonly includes buffer-related reports.
Developer training on secure coding reduces introduction of memory-buffer errors.
Patching replaces vulnerable code containing buffer-boundary defects.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Security testing in development catches out-of-bounds accesses before release, covering most instances of the weakness.
Secure development lifecycle mandates memory-safety practices that directly prevent buffer-boundary violations.
Application security requirements can specify memory-safety rules, but do not prescribe implementation details.
Secure architecture and engineering principles include memory-safe design patterns that mitigate buffer overflows.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe buffer operations, directly eliminating CWE-119.