Ubuntu LinuxOperating system · Canonical
CVE-2015-6824
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 sws_init_context function in libswscale/utils.c in FFmpeg before 2.7.2 does not initialize certain pixbuf data structures, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (segmentation violation) or possibly have unspecified other impact via crafted video 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 confidenceFFmpeg's sws_init_context function in libswscale/utils.c fails to properly initialize certain pixbuf data structures before use. When processing crafted video data, this uninitialized memory can cause a segmentation violation (DoS) or potentially lead to unspecified other impact.
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
Ubuntu LinuxOperating system
= 12.04<= 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.
-
Verify FFmpeg is installedRun 'ffmpeg -version' or check for the ffmpeg package using your system package manager (dpkg -l | grep ffmpeg or rpm -qa | grep ffmpeg)Affected if FFmpeg is not installed, the system is not affected by this vulnerability
-
Determine installed FFmpeg versionRun 'ffmpeg -version' and note the version number displayed in the outputAffected if The version is 2.7.1 or earlier, the system falls within the affected version range
-
Identify libswscale library presenceCheck for the presence of libswscale library files (such as libswscale.so or libswscale.a) in standard library directories like /usr/lib/ or /usr/local/lib/Affected if libswscale exists on the system and is used by FFmpeg installations of affected versions
-
Confirm video processing capabilityVerify FFmpeg can process video files by running 'ffmpeg -formats' or attempting to decode a test video fileAffected if FFmpeg can process video, meaning the sws_init_context function in libswscale/utils.c will be invoked during video scaling operations
-
Check Ubuntu version if applicableIf running Ubuntu Linux, run 'lsb_release -a' or check /etc/lsb-release to confirm versionAffected if Running Ubuntu 12.04 with FFmpeg installed, the system is within the affected product range
A system is affected if it runs FFmpeg version 2.7.1 or earlier (or Ubuntu 12.04 with any FFmpeg version) and uses the libswscale component to process video data, triggering the uninitialized memory issue in sws_init_context.
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 which includes proper initialization of the pixbuf data structures in sws_init_context.
Fix this in Ubuntu Linux
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing8.0 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 $4,288.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2015-6824 — 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-2015-6824 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