CVE-2026-1418VulnerabilityPublished 26 Jan 2026Updated 23 Feb 2026

CVE-2026-1418: GPAC · Out-of-bounds Write

Affects GPACSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.8 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

4.8Medium

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

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 14% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:L/UI:N/VC:L/VI:L/VA:L/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:P

Base metrics

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: Low
Vulnerable system integrity: Low
Vulnerable system availability: Low
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

Threat metrics

Exploit Maturity: POC

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

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable system 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 through terminal emulation (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., using social engineering techniques to trick a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
Attack Complexity: Low: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker requires privileges that provide basic capabilities that are typically limited to settings and resources owned by a single low-privileged user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system 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 Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact to the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system 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 Vulnerable System 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 Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Exploit Maturity: POC: Based on threat intelligence sources each of the following must apply: · Proof-of-concept is publicly available · No knowledge of reported attempts to exploit this vulnerability · No knowledge of publicly available solutions used to simplify attempts to exploit the vulnerability

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 26 Jan 2026
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 2026-10-26.

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 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
GPAC	Affected =2.0 =2.1 =2.2 =2.3 =2.4.0	Fixed in–
GitHubgpac/gpac`pkg:github/gpac/gpac`Other threats	Affected =2.0 =2.1 =2.2 =2.3 =2.4.0	Fixed in–

CPE configurations (1)

cpe:2.3:a:gpac:gpac:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*

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-2026-1418, organizations should immediately apply the official patch identified by commit 10c73b82cf0e367383d091db38566a0e4fe71772 to all GPAC installations running versions 2.0 through 2.4.0. If patching is not immediately feasible, restrict local access to systems running GPAC to trusted users only, minimizing the risk of local exploitation. Employ strict access controls and monitoring on systems where GPAC is deployed, especially in multi-user environments. Consider running GPAC processes with the least privileges necessary to limit the impact of potential exploitation. Regularly audit and update multimedia processing software to the latest versions. Additionally, implement host-based intrusion detection systems (HIDS) to detect abnormal application behavior or crashes related to subtitle processing. Educate system administrators about the risks of local vulnerabilities in multimedia frameworks and the importance of timely patch management.

Description

A security vulnerability has been detected in GPAC up to 2.4.0. This affects the function gf_text_import_srt_bifs of the file src/scene_manager/text_to_bifs.c of the component SRT Subtitle Import. Such manipulation leads to out-of-bounds write. The attack needs to be performed locally. The exploit has been disclosed publicly and may be used. The name of the patch is 10c73b82cf0e367383d091db38566a0e4fe71772. It is best practice to apply a patch to resolve this issue.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2026-1418 is on the integrity and availability of systems running vulnerable versions of GPAC. Successful exploitation can cause application crashes, leading to denial of service conditions. In some scenarios, the out-of-bounds write could be leveraged for local privilege escalation, allowing attackers to gain higher system privileges and potentially compromise the host. Since the attack requires local access, the threat is limited to environments where untrusted users have some level of system access. Organizations using GPAC in multimedia processing, streaming, or content delivery pipelines may face disruptions or security breaches if this vulnerability is exploited. The absence of known exploits in the wild reduces immediate risk but the public disclosure increases the likelihood of future exploit development. Systems running GPAC on multi-user or shared environments are at higher risk. The vulnerability does not affect remote systems directly, limiting its impact on large-scale network attacks.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…