CVE-2015-6819
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 integer underflows in the ff_mjpeg_decode_frame function in libavcodec/mjpegdec.c in FFmpeg before 2.7.2 allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service (out-of-bounds array access) or possibly have unspecified other impact via crafted MJPEG data.
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 confidenceMultiple integer underflow vulnerabilities in the ff_mjpeg_decode_frame function in libavcodec/mjpegdec.c allow remote attackers to cause out-of-bounds array access via crafted MJPEG data. The underflow occurs during size calculations when processing MJPEG frames, leading to incorrect memory index computation and potential memory corruption or denial of service.
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<= 2.7.1CVSS 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
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/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 FFmpeg installation and versionRun 'ffmpeg -version' or 'avconv -version' to display the installed version. If using the library directly, check libavcodec version via 'pkg-config --modversion libavcodec' or inspect the binary with 'ffmpeg -version | grep version'Affected if The displayed version number is 2.7.1 or lower
-
Locate the libavcodec library fileOn Linux: 'ldd $(which ffmpeg) | grep avcodec' or 'find /usr -name "libavcodec*" 2>/dev/null'. On Windows: check the bin directory where FFmpeg is installed for avcodec*.dllAffected if The library exists and the linked FFmpeg version is 2.7.1 or lower
-
Verify MJPEG decoding capability is presentRun 'ffmpeg -decoders | grep -i mjpeg' or 'ffmpeg -formats | grep -i mjpeg' to confirm MJPEG demuxer and decoder are compiled into the binaryAffected if MJPEG decoder is available and the FFmpeg version is 2.7.1 or lower
-
Check for active MJPEG processing in your environmentReview application logs, configuration files, or transcoding pipelines that process MJPEG, Motion JPEG, or AVI/MOV files containing MJPEG streams. Search config files for mjpeg-related modules or input pathsAffected if Any system or application processes MJPEG input streams using the affected FFmpeg version
You are affected if FFmpeg version 2.7.1 or lower is installed and any component in your environment processes MJPEG video data using the libavcodec MJPEG decoder.
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 FFmpeg to version 2.7.2 or later to obtain the patched integer underflow protections in the MJPEG decoder. Validate all MJPEG input processing paths after upgrading to ensure proper functionality.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2015-6819 — 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-2015-6819 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