Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2023-38103 is a high-severity Integer Overflow or Wraparound (CWE-190) vulnerability in Gstreamer Gstreamer. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked in the top 28% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SA-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
GStreamer is affected by an integer overflow vulnerability during RealMedia file parsing that can result in remote code execution. The flaw, assigned CWE-190, resides in the rmdemux module's handling of MDPR chunks where insufficient validation of attacker-controlled values permits an overflow before a buffer is allocated. The issue was reported as ZDI-CAN-21443 and carries a CVSS 3.1 score of 8.8.
Remote attackers can trigger the vulnerability by delivering a crafted RealMedia file to any application that uses the affected GStreamer library. Successful exploitation allows arbitrary code execution in the context of the consuming process; the attack requires user interaction but needs no prior authentication and can be performed over the network.
Publicly referenced patches from the GStreamer project add explicit integer-overflow checks when calculating MDPR chunk sizes, and the Zero Day Initiative advisory ZDI-23-1007 provides additional technical detail on the flaw. The associated EPSS score has remained flat at 0.0786 with no material increase observed after disclosure.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2023-41929
Vulnerability Data
GStreamer RealMedia File Parsing Integer Overflow Remote Code Execution Vulnerability. This vulnerability allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code on affected installations of GStreamer. Interaction with this library is required to exploit this vulnerability but attack vectors may vary depending…
more
on the implementation. The specific flaw exists within the parsing of MDPR chunks. The issue results from the lack of proper validation of user-supplied data, which can result in an integer overflow before allocating a buffer. An attacker can leverage this vulnerability to execute code in the context of the current process. Was ZDI-CAN-21443.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V5.2.6
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation (static analysis, fuzzing, unit tests) directly finds integer overflow defects before deployment.
Secure engineering principles require use of safe arithmetic constructs or language features that structurally eliminate integer overflow during calculation.
Input validation enforces bounds on values before arithmetic, stopping the conditions that trigger overflow or wraparound.
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 directly require use of safe arithmetic, bounds checks, and testing that prevent integer overflows.
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 can detect integer overflows before release.
Secure SDLC mandates input validation and arithmetic checks that prevent integer overflows.
Application security requirements include bounds checking and safe arithmetic to avoid overflow conditions.
Secure architecture principles require defensive coding patterns that mitigate integer wraparound risks.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe integer operations and mandate overflow-safe constructs.