CVE-2012-0854
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedThe dpcm_decode_frame function in libavcodec/dpcm.c in FFmpeg before 0.9.1 does not use the proper pointer after an audio API change, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (application crash) via unspecified vectors, which triggers a heap-based buffer overflow.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · moderate confidenceThe dpcm_decode_frame function in libavcodec/dpcm.c in FFmpeg before version 0.9.1 uses an incorrect pointer after an audio API change, which triggers a heap-based buffer overflow. This can be triggered when processing DPCM audio frames, leading to denial of service via application crash.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data<= 0.9= 0.3= 0.3.1= 0.3.2= 0.3.3= 0.3.4= 0.4.0= 0.4.2= 0.4.3= 0.4.4= 0.4.5= 0.4.6CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:P
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Verify FFmpeg is installedRun 'ffmpeg -version' or check for the binary at /usr/bin/ffmpegAffected if FFmpeg command executes and shows a version number
-
Identify installed FFmpeg versionParse the output from 'ffmpeg -version' to get the exact version number (e.g., 0.9, 0.4.6, 0.3.2)Affected if The version matches any of these: <= 0.9, 0.3, 0.3.1, 0.3.2, 0.3.3, 0.3.4, 0.4.0, 0.4.2, 0.4.3, 0.4.4, 0.4.5, or 0.4.6
-
Check if DPCM decoder is availableRun 'ffmpeg -codecs | grep -i dpcm' to list DPCM audio decoders supported by the installationAffected if DPCM decoders (such as roq_dpcm, sol_dpcm, xan_dpcm, or similar) appear in the supported codec list
-
Confirm DPCM audio processing is occurringInspect application logs, transcoding commands, or media files being processed to determine if DPCM-encoded audio is being decodedAffected if The system is actively decoding DPCM audio frames using the affected libavcodec/dpcm.c decoder
The system is affected if FFmpeg version 0.9 or earlier (including 0.3.x through 0.4.6) is installed AND DPCM audio files are being processed by the vulnerable dpcm_decode_frame function in libavcodec/dpcm.c.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataUpgrade to FFmpeg 0.9.1 or later to obtain the corrected pointer usage in the dpcm_decode_frame function. If upgrading is not possible, review and correct the pointer handling in libavcodec/dpcm.c relative to the audio API changes.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,904.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-0854 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2012-0854 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data