Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:LSummary
CVE-2026-12892 is a medium-severity Out-of-bounds Read (CWE-125) vulnerability in Redhat Enterprise Linux. Its CVSS base score is 4.4 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Malicious File (T1204.002); ranked at the 2th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SI-10 (Information Input Validation) and SI-2 (Flaw Remediation) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-38607
Vulnerability Data
A flaw was found in GStreamer's gst-plugins-bad package. When processing a specially crafted H.264 video file containing malformed MVC or SVC extension slice NAL units, a 1-byte heap out-of-bounds read can occur during parsing. This happens when the parser attempts…
more
to check slice boundary information without first verifying that the NAL unit contains enough data beyond the extension header. An attacker could exploit this by tricking a user into opening a malicious H.264 video file, potentially causing the application to crash or leak a single byte of heap memory.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
Directly enables user execution via opening a malicious H.264 video file (out-of-bounds read during parsing).
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly requires validation of input data size and structure before parsing H.264 NAL units, eliminating the missing bounds check that causes the 1-byte OOB read.
Mandates timely patching of the gst-plugins-bad parser flaw so the vulnerable code path is removed before a crafted MVC/SVC file can be processed.
Can block or quarantine malicious H.264 files containing malformed extension slices before they reach the vulnerable GStreamer parser.
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-development practices such as bounds checking and memory-safe languages directly prevent out-of-bounds reads.
Vulnerability scanning and recording can discover instances of out-of-bounds reads after code is deployed.
Routine patching replaces vulnerable code containing out-of-bounds read flaws.
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 and acceptance includes fuzzing and static analysis that detect out-of-bounds read defects before release.
Logging can record evidence of an out-of-bounds read but does not prevent the weakness itself.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and bounds checking that directly prevent out-of-bounds reads.
Application security requirements include explicit bounds and memory-safety specifications that mitigate buffer over-reads.
Secure system architecture and engineering principles require memory-safe design patterns and runtime protections against out-of-bounds access.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe pointer arithmetic and mandate bounds-checked reads, eliminating CWE-125.