CVE-2012-2812
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 exif_entry_get_value function in exif-entry.c in the EXIF Tag Parsing Library (aka libexif) before 0.6.21 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (out-of-bounds read) or possibly obtain sensitive information from process memory via crafted EXIF tags in an image.
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 · high confidenceOut-of-bounds read vulnerability in libexif's exif_entry_get_value function in exif-entry.c. When processing crafted EXIF tags in image files, the function reads beyond allocated buffer boundaries, potentially causing denial of service or exposing sensitive process memory contents.
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<= 0.6.20= 0.6.14= 0.6.15= 0.6.16= 0.6.18= 0.6.19CVSS 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
- Partial
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/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.
-
Identify installed libexif versionRun 'pkg-config --modversion libexif' or check the library file with 'dpkg -l libexif*' (Debian) or 'rpm -qi libexif' (RHEL). On Windows, inspect the file properties of libexif.dll.Affected if Version is 0.6.14, 0.6.15, 0.6.16, 0.6.18, 0.6.19, or any version 0.6.20 or lower.
-
Verify application links to libexifUse 'ldd <application_binary>' on Linux to see if libexif is loaded, or check dependencies on Windows with a tool like Dependency Walker.Affected if The application links against libexif and processes image files containing EXIF metadata.
-
Confirm EXIF processing is activeReview application logs or usage patterns for image processing activity. Check if the application processes JPEG, TIFF, or other image formats that commonly contain EXIF data.Affected if The application reads or parses EXIF metadata from user-supplied or network-received images.
-
Check for vulnerable code pathIf source code is available, search for calls to exif_entry_get_value function in the codebase. This function is invoked when extracting EXIF tag values from images.Affected if The application calls exif_entry_get_value to process EXIF tags from untrusted image sources.
You are affected if your system has libexif version 0.6.20 or lower AND applications process EXIF metadata from image files.
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 libexif to version 0.6.21 or later to patch the vulnerability. Audit all applications and services that link against libexif and rebuild/redeploy them with the patched library.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2012-2812 — 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-2012-2812 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