CVE Intelligence
Skip to main content
MEDIUM

CVE-2022-3810

CVE-2022-3810 — Axiomatic Bento4 mp42hevc Mp42Hevc.cpp AP4_File denial of service

A vulnerability was found in Axiomatic Bento4. It has been classified as problematic. This affects the function AP4_File::AP4_File of the file Mp42Hevc.cpp of the component mp42hevc. The manipulation leads to denial of service. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The exploit has been disclosed to the public and may be used. The associated identifier of this vulnerability is VDB-212667.

Published Updated Sources: cvelistV5, VulDB

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the scoring sources call it.

Exploitation

Unreported

no source claims exploitation

EPSS

1%

chance of exploitation in 30 days

Affects

axiomatic

bento4

CVSS base

4.3

MEDIUM

CISA SSVC assessment

Three decision points CISA publishes for the CVEs it assesses · SSVC 2.0.3. A stakeholder decision, not a severity score.

CISA

Exploitation

PoC

none · proof-of-concept · active

Automatable

No

can an attacker script all four kill-chain steps

Technical impact

Partial

partial · total control of the vulnerable component

Affected scope

The catalog records vendors and products as separate lists, not pairs, so which product belongs to which vendor is not something this page can say.

Vendors (1)

Products (1)

bento4

Every base score collected

Sources score independently and disagree; each row says who scored it and under which version.

ScoreVersionSeverityExpl.ImpactSource
4.3CVSS 3.1MEDIUMcvelistV5

Weakness & attack patterns

  • CWE-404

Attack patterns reported against this CVE. The ATT&CK techniques below are inferred from its weakness class.

  • T1498.001Network Denial of Service: Direct Network Flood
  • T1499Endpoint Denial of Service
  • T1499.003Endpoint Denial of Service: Application Exhaustion Flood

References

3 on the record

Elsewhere on this site

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

  • No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
  • No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
  • No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.