CVE-2012-2785
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 · uneditedMultiple unspecified vulnerabilities in libavcodec/wmalosslessdec.c in FFmpeg before 0.11 have unknown impact and attack vectors, related to (1) "some subframes only encode some channels" or (2) a large order value.
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 confidenceMultiple unspecified vulnerabilities exist in libavcodec/wmalosslessdec.c in FFmpeg versions before 0.11. The vulnerabilities relate to improper handling of subframes that encode only some channels and to large order values in WMA Lossless audio decoding. Despite the CVSS score of 10, the specific exploitation details and impact remain undefined in the available description.
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<= 0.10.4= 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
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
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.
-
Check installed FFmpeg versionRun `ffmpeg -version` or `ffmpeg -buildinfo` to display the version numberAffected if The version is 0.10.4 or earlier, or matches 0.3.x (0.3 through 0.3.4), or matches 0.4.x (0.4.0, 0.4.2 through 0.4.6)
-
Verify libavcodec component existsCheck for the presence of libavcodec library on the system (common paths include /usr/lib/ or /usr/local/lib/)Affected if libavcodec is present and its version matches the affected version range from step 1
-
Identify WMA Lossless audio decoding usageInspect any media processing logs, pipelines, or applications that use FFmpeg for audio decoding; look for .wma files or content with codec 'wmalossless'Affected if WMA Lossless audio files are being decoded by the affected FFmpeg installation
You are affected if FFmpeg version is 0.10.4 or earlier, or any version 0.3.x through 0.4.6 (excluding 0.4.1 and 0.4.7), AND WMA Lossless audio is being processed.
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.
dbcve · scopedUpgrade FFmpeg to version 0.11 or later to obtain the patched wmalosslessdec.c component. If direct library upgrade is not feasible, ensure any media processing pipelines that decode WMA Lossless audio are isolated and monitored.
FFmpeg 0.11 or later
- 1. Identify the current FFmpeg version by running 'ffmpeg -version'
- 2. If version is 0.10.4 or earlier, or 0.3.x series, plan for upgrade
- 3. Obtain FFmpeg 0.11 or later from the official ffmpeg.org website or trusted package repositories
- 4. Install the new version following standard build procedures or package manager instructions
- 5. Verify the new version is installed by running 'ffmpeg -version'
- 6. Test that WMA lossless decoding functionality works as expected with the new version
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,808.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-2785 — 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-2012-2785 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