Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-73433 is a medium-severity Wrap or Wraparound (CWE-191) vulnerability in Redhat Enterprise Linux. Its CVSS base score is 6.6 (Medium).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 3th 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 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-2026-57444
Vulnerability Data
A flaw was found in GStreamer gst-plugins-good (avidemux). When parsing FUJIFILM metadata in an AVI strd chunk, gst_avi_demux_parse_strd() decrements a remaining-length counter by fixed offsets (98 and 10 bytes) without verifying sufficient data remains. For crafted strd payloads of exactly…
more
106 or 107 bytes, the counter underflows to a very large unsigned value, causing subsequent null-terminated string scanning to read far beyond the allocated heap buffer. Date-format normalization may also write beyond the buffer end. Confirmed impacts include heap out-of-bounds read, out-of-bounds write, heap information disclosure (adjacent data appearing in parsed metadata), and application crash/denial of service. The avidemux element is auto-plugged by playbin, decodebin, and gst-discoverer, so opening or previewing a crafted AVI is sufficient to trigger the issue. Fixed upstream in gst-plugins-good 1.28.6 (GStreamer-SA-2026-0072).
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and static/dynamic analysis directly find integer underflow defects before code is released.
Security engineering principles require use of safe arithmetic constructs or language features that structurally eliminate integer underflow during subtraction.
Input validation can reject or sanitize values that would cause a subtraction to underflow the representable range.
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 catches integer underflow defects before release.
Secure development lifecycle mandates input validation and arithmetic checks that prevent integer underflow.
Application security requirements include bounds checking and safe arithmetic to avoid underflow conditions.
Secure architecture principles require defensive coding patterns that mitigate integer wraparound risks.
Secure coding standards directly prescribe safe integer handling and overflow/underflow prevention.