←back to thread

104 points trollied | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.217s | source
Show context
vqtska ◴[] No.45785720[source]
I wonder if this vulnerable codec is enabled by default when building FFmpeg? Because if so, then it doesn't matter that it's a "1990s game codec" because any application using FFmpeg to accept arbitrary video files is vulnerable to memory corruption, which should probably be taken more seriously.
replies(4): >>45785760 #>>45785825 #>>45786027 #>>45786093 #
IshKebab ◴[] No.45786093[source]
I checked with Ubuntu's ffmpeg and it is enabled by default. There are a huge list of codecs enabled by default (maybe all of them?). Given the security track record of codecs implemented in C, this means it's basically guaranteed that there are dozens of security vulnerabilities in ffmpeg.

I think the same is probably true for VLC to a lesser extent, which is pretty wild considering I've never heard of it being used as an attack vector, e.g. via torrents.

replies(3): >>45786299 #>>45787464 #>>45791239 #
haskellshill ◴[] No.45786299[source]
VLC is pretty popular on windows, but ffmpeg? Is there any commonly used windows app that relies on it? I doubt it'd be worth one's time to write exploits for desktop linux
replies(5): >>45786332 #>>45788108 #>>45788182 #>>45788671 #>>45790151 #
dpe82 ◴[] No.45788108[source]
VLC and ffmpeg share the same underlying library family (libav*) where this vulnerability lives.

> I doubt it'd be worth one's time to write exploits for desktop Linux

How many developers, network administrators, etc. run desktop Linux? Gaining access to those can be very, very valuable.

replies(1): >>45788198 #
brigade ◴[] No.45788198[source]
FFmpeg based players have been popular for 20 years now. Has there been a single documented actual use of their libraries as the exploitation vector anytime in the last two decades?
replies(2): >>45788461 #>>45788771 #
dns_snek ◴[] No.45788771[source]
Does this count?

https://signal.org/blog/cellebrite-vulnerabilities/

> Given the number of opportunities present, we found that it’s possible to execute arbitrary code on a Cellebrite machine simply by including a specially formatted but otherwise innocuous file in any app on a device that is subsequently plugged into Cellebrite and scanned. There are virtually no limits on the code that can be executed.

But it was a product using a 9 year old ffmpeg build (at the time).

replies(2): >>45791209 #>>45791264 #
brigade ◴[] No.45791209[source]
I'd still consider that an academic exercise rather than an exploit that was deployed in the real world (aka against a machine the attacker did not control)
replies(1): >>45794162 #
1. renewiltord ◴[] No.45794162[source]
Yeah, that’s just how life is. We used to run with Heartbleed and Spectre turned off.