CVE-2018-14544
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 · uneditedThere exists one invalid memory read bug in AP4_SampleDescription::GetFormat() in Ap4SampleDescription.h in Bento4 1.5.1-624, which can allow attackers to cause a denial-of-service via a crafted mp4 file. This vulnerability can be triggered by the executable mp42ts.
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 confidenceAn invalid memory read vulnerability exists in AP4_SampleDescription::GetFormat() in Bento4 library version 1.5.1-624. The vulnerability occurs during MP4 file parsing when processing sample descriptions, leading to an out-of-bounds read. Attackers can trigger this by providing a crafted MP4 file to the mp42ts executable, causing a denial-of-service condition.
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= 1.5.1-624CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
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.
-
Locate the mp42ts executableSearch for the mp42ts binary on the system using 'which mp42ts' on Linux/Mac or 'where mp42ts' on Windows, or check common installation directoriesAffected if The mp42ts executable is not found on the system, meaning Bento4 is likely not installed
-
Identify the installed Bento4 versionRun 'mp42ts --version' or 'mp42ts -V' to retrieve the version number of the Bento4 installationAffected if The version reported is 1.5.1-624 exactly, indicating the specific affected version
-
Verify MP4 processing usageReview logs, command history, or automation scripts that invoke mp42ts to process MP4 files, noting the source of input filesAffected if The mp42ts tool is being used to parse MP4 files, particularly from untrusted or external sources
-
Check for recent MP4 file processingInspect the input files provided to mp42ts or check for any recently processed MP4 files in working directoriesAffected if MP4 files from untrusted sources have been processed through mp42ts recently
A user is affected if the Bento4 mp42ts executable version equals 1.5.1-624 AND is being used to parse MP4 files, particularly untrusted ones, enabling the out-of-bounds read in AP4_SampleDescription::GetFormat().
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 dataUpdate Bento4 to a patched version that includes proper bounds checking in AP4_SampleDescription::GetFormat(). Until then, validate all MP4 files before processing and restrict processing of untrusted MP4 files.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation3.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $2,272.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-14544 — 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-2018-14544 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