Raw vector
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/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:XSummary
CVE-2024-47606 is a high-severity Integer Overflow or Wraparound (CWE-190) vulnerability in Gstreamer Gstreamer. Its CVSS base score is 8.6 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked in the top 31% 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.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-42823
Vulnerability Data
GStreamer is a library for constructing graphs of media-handling components. An integer underflow has been detected in the function qtdemux_parse_theora_extension within qtdemux.c. The vulnerability occurs due to an underflow of the gint size variable, which causes size to hold a…
more
large unintended value when cast to an unsigned integer. This 32-bit negative value is then cast to a 64-bit unsigned integer (0xfffffffffffffffa) in a subsequent call to gst_buffer_new_and_alloc. The function gst_buffer_new_allocate then attempts to allocate memory, eventually calling _sysmem_new_block. The function _sysmem_new_block adds alignment and header size to the (unsigned) size, causing the overflow of the 'slice_size' variable. As a result, only 0x89 bytes are allocated, despite the large input size. When the following memcpy call occurs in gst_buffer_fill, the data from the input file will overwrite the content of the GstMapInfo info structure. Finally, during the call to gst_memory_unmap, the overwritten memory may cause a function pointer hijack, as the mem->allocator->mem_unmap_full function is called with a corrupted pointer. This function pointer overwrite could allow an attacker to alter the execution flow of the program, leading to arbitrary code execution. This vulnerability is fixed in 1.24.10.
- 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 prevent integer underflow defects via input validation, bounds checking, and static analysis.
Vulnerability scanning and code analysis can surface underflow flaws after they are introduced.
Routine patching can remediate known underflow bugs once they are discovered in deployed software.
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.