VulnerabilityPublished 8 Jan 2024Updated 3 Jun 2025

CVE-2024-0322: gpac/gpac · Out-of-bounds Read

Affects gpac/gpacSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.4 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 12:29 UTC

CVSS 3.0 base score

4.4Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.9% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 60% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:L

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: None
Availability: Low

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either: the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 8 Jan 2024
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
GitHubgpac/gpac`pkg:github/gpac/gpac`Other threats	Affected =2.3-DEV	Fixed in–

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2024-0322, European organizations should: 1) Monitor the gpac project repositories and security advisories closely for official patches or updates addressing this vulnerability and apply them promptly. 2) Restrict local access to systems running gpac to trusted users only, minimizing the risk of exploitation via local user interaction. 3) Implement application whitelisting and endpoint protection to detect and prevent execution of unauthorized or malicious media files that could trigger the vulnerability. 4) Employ sandboxing or containerization techniques for media processing applications to limit the impact of potential crashes or memory corruption. 5) Conduct regular security audits and code reviews if using customized versions of gpac to identify and remediate similar memory safety issues. 6) Educate users about the risks of opening untrusted media files and enforce strict policies on media content ingestion. These targeted measures go beyond generic advice by focusing on controlling local access, monitoring for updates, and isolating vulnerable components within multimedia processing environments.

Description

Out-of-bounds Read in GitHub repository gpac/gpac prior to 2.3-DEV.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of CVE-2024-0322 depends largely on the deployment of gpac within their IT environments. Organizations involved in multimedia processing, broadcasting, content delivery networks, or media streaming services that utilize gpac could face risks of information leakage or service disruption. The out-of-bounds read could lead to application crashes, causing denial of service conditions in media processing pipelines. Although the confidentiality impact is low, sensitive media content or metadata might be exposed if exploited. The requirement for local access and user interaction limits remote exploitation, reducing the risk for large-scale attacks. However, insider threats or compromised local accounts could leverage this vulnerability to disrupt media services or gain limited information disclosure. Given the increasing reliance on multimedia frameworks in digital media industries across Europe, the vulnerability could affect service availability and reliability, impacting business operations and user experience.

CWE-125Out-of-bounds Read (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessCWE Top 25 (2025): #8
The product reads data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.
Implementation · Input Validation
Assume all input is malicious. Use an "accept known good" input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does.
Architecture and Design · Language Selection
Use a language that provides appropriate memory abstractions.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Overread Buffers (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 3 Jul 2025, 23:57 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-125

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats