Security Resilience

CVE-2023-6602

Ffmpeg 2.0 – 6.0

Public PoC
Published
31 December 2024
Modified
03 November 2025
CVSS Score v3.1 5.3
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N
EPSS Score 0.0051 42th percentile
Risk Priority 45 floored blend · peak EPSS

CVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.

Summary

CVE-2023-6602 is a medium-severity Resource Injection (CWE-99) vulnerability in Ffmpeg Ffmpeg. Its CVSS base score is 5.3 (Medium).

Operationally, ranked at the 42th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SI-10 (Information Input Validation) and AC-3 (Access Enforcement) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

A flaw was found in FFmpeg's TTY Demuxer. This vulnerability allows possible data exfiltration via improper parsing of non-TTY-compliant input files in HLS playlists.

CWE(s)

Related Threats

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2023-6605Same product: Ffmpeg Ffmpeg
CVE-2023-6601Same product: Ffmpeg Ffmpeg
CVE-2023-6604Same product: Ffmpeg Ffmpeg
CVE-2026-40962Same product: Ffmpeg Ffmpeg
CVE-2024-36619Same product: Ffmpeg Ffmpeg
CVE-2026-30999Same product: Ffmpeg Ffmpeg
CVE-2026-66039Same product: Ffmpeg Ffmpeg
CVE-2026-64832Same product: Ffmpeg Ffmpeg
CVE-2026-70628Same product: Ffmpeg Ffmpeg
CVE-2025-69693Same product: Ffmpeg Ffmpeg

Affected Assets

ffmpeg
ffmpeg
2.0 — 6.0

Mitigating Controls

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

Directly requires validation of inputs before they are accepted as resource identifiers.

Enforces authorizations on resource access so an injected identifier cannot reach outside the intended sphere.

Enforces information flow rules that block use of untrusted identifiers to reach unauthorized resources.

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.

blocks

A.8.25 mandates secure SDLC practices including secure coding guidelines, security requirements, testing (scans/penetration), and developer training that reduce the chance of introducing resource injection flaws, but does not guarantee their absence at runtime and leaves a bounded remainder (e.g. incomplete enforcement of input restrictions or flaws in non-development phases).

blocks

Application security requirements explicitly call for controls on external identifiers used to access resources.

blocks

A.8.27 mandates security-by-design principles (e.g. distrust external input, least privilege, fail securely, data validation/sanitization) and design reviews that can stop resource injection from reaching production, but this is only a minority slice of CWE-99 because the control sets process expectations rather than mandating any specific runtime enforcement mechanism that would block exploitation of every possible identifier misuse.

prevents

Secure coding standards require strict validation and whitelisting of all resource identifiers before use.

finds

Security testing can detect resource-injection flaws but does not itself implement preventive controls.

Hardening callouts derived

DISA STIG baselines are authored against specific weaknesses. Where this CVE cites a broad weakness class, the mapping is not asserted at that abstraction (owner ruling, 2026-09-25: grade only at Base and below), so no rule is shown here rather than a rule shown against the wrong grain.

  • No fine-grained STIG row for CWE-99, a class-level weakness, and none of its children carries one either.

References