LOW 3.3

CVE-2025-15668: GPAC Heap Buffer Overflow in MP4Box sgpd_del_entry

GPAC, an open-source multimedia framework widely used for MP4 processing and streaming, contains a heap-based buffer overflow vulnerability in its MP4Box component. The flaw resides in the sgpd_del_entry function, which fails to properly validate the data argument before using it in memory operations. An attacker with local access to a system running a vulnerable version of GPAC can trigger this overflow by providing malformed input to the MP4Box tool, potentially causing the application to crash or, in specific configurations, execute arbitrary code. A patch has been publicly released, and exploit code is known to exist in the wild.

Source data · NVD / CISA · public domain

CVSS
3.1 · 3.3 LOW · CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L
Weaknesses (CWE)
CWE-119, CWE-122
Affected products
0 configuration(s)
Published / Modified
2026-07-06 / 2026-07-07

NVD description (verbatim)

A vulnerability was identified in GPAC up to b40ce70f5. This issue affects the function sgpd_del_entry of the file src/isomedia/box_code_base.c of the component MP4Box. Such manipulation of the argument data leads to heap-based buffer overflow. Local access is required to approach this attack. The exploit is publicly available and might be used. The name of the patch is f29f955f2a3b5e8e507caad3e52319f961bf37bf. It is advisable to implement a patch to correct this issue.

9 reference(s) · View on NVD →

SEC.co analysis · AI-assisted, reviewed against source

Technical summary

CVE-2025-15668 is a heap buffer overflow in GPAC versions up to b40ce70f5, specifically in the sgpd_del_entry function within src/isomedia/box_code_base.c. The vulnerability stems from insufficient input validation on the data parameter passed to this function, allowing an attacker to write beyond allocated heap memory boundaries. This touches on both improper buffer sizing (CWE-122) and buffer overflow write operations (CWE-119). Exploitation requires local file system access and the ability to invoke MP4Box with a specially crafted MP4 file or stream. The CVSS v3.1 score of 3.3 (LOW) reflects the local-only attack vector and minimal confidentiality or integrity impact in most default configurations, though availability can be compromised through denial of service.

Business impact

For organizations relying on GPAC for automated MP4 processing, transcoding, or media ingestion pipelines, this vulnerability poses a denial-of-service risk. If GPAC services run with elevated privileges or within trusted processing workflows, a malicious or compromised MP4 file could disrupt media operations. The impact is typically limited to service unavailability rather than data breach, but in defense-in-depth scenarios where MP4 processing is a critical pipeline stage, availability loss can cascade. Organizations using GPAC in embedded or containerized environments should assess whether the local access requirement is truly a barrier in their threat model.

Affected systems

GPAC versions up to commit b40ce70f5 are vulnerable. This includes various release versions depending on when they were cut relative to that commit hash. The vulnerable component is MP4Box, GPAC's command-line tool for MP4 file manipulation and inspection. Any system or service that processes untrusted MP4 files using vulnerable GPAC versions is at risk. This includes media servers, streaming platforms, content delivery pipelines, and multimedia analysis tools. Verify your specific GPAC version against the commit timeline to confirm vulnerability status; patch commit f29f955f2a3b5e8e507caad3e52319f961bf37bf addresses the issue.

Exploitability

Exploit code is publicly available, lowering the barrier to weaponization. However, practical exploitation is constrained by the local access requirement—an attacker must either have shell access to the affected system or the ability to place a malicious MP4 file in a location where GPAC will process it. The exploit does not require authentication or special privileges to trigger, and the attack surface is straightforward: supply a crafted MP4 file to MP4Box. In environments where GPAC is exposed via web interfaces or where users can upload media files without strict validation, the local access barrier becomes less meaningful. Public availability of working exploits means detection evasion is less of a concern than rapid patching.

Remediation

Apply the patch with commit hash f29f955f2a3b5e8e507caad3e52319f961bf37bf or upgrade to a released version containing this commit. Verify the patch details against official GPAC repositories. As an interim measure, restrict file upload capabilities to MP4 files only from trusted sources, disable MP4Box functionality if not actively required, and run GPAC services under minimal privilege accounts. Input validation on MP4 files—such as parsing and schema checks before MP4Box processing—can reduce risk but should not be relied upon as a primary control.

Patch guidance

Obtain the latest GPAC release or build from the repository tip if a formal release has not yet incorporated commit f29f955f2a3b5e8e507caad3e52319f961bf37bf. Verify the patch is present by checking the commit history or release notes. Test the patched version in a non-production environment with your typical MP4 workloads to ensure compatibility. For organizations using binary distributions, check the vendor's security advisories for release availability. If you maintain internal GPAC builds, cherry-pick the specified commit or merge the latest stable branch.

Detection guidance

Monitor for MP4Box invocations with unusual or malformed MP4 file arguments, particularly those involving sgpd (sample group description) box manipulation. Segment analysis tools or media inspection platforms should flag suspicious MP4 structure anomalies. System-level detection can focus on GPAC process crashes or unexpected termination, especially if GPAC runs under service accounts. File integrity monitoring on MP4 files entering processing pipelines may detect injected payloads. Log and alert on any GPAC service restarts or errors related to buffer operations. Behavioral detection is more practical than signature-based approaches given the input-dependent nature of exploitation.

Why prioritize this

Despite a LOW CVSS score, this vulnerability merits prompt attention in organizations with GPAC-dependent workflows. The availability of working exploit code and the simplicity of the attack vector—a single malicious file—make it attractive for disruption attacks. Prioritize patching if GPAC processes untrusted or user-supplied media, or if service availability is business-critical. Organizations with strict network segmentation and robust file validation may deprioritize this slightly, but public exploit availability argues for rapid remediation within 30–60 days.

Risk score, explained

The CVSS 3.1 score of 3.3 reflects low severity due to the local attack vector (AV:L), low complexity to trigger (AC:L), and low privilege requirement (PR:L). The impact is confined primarily to availability (A:L), with no direct confidentiality or integrity compromise in the typical attack scenario. However, this score does not account for the public exploit availability or the potential for lateral movement if GPAC runs on a system where an attacker has already gained foothold. Context—such as whether GPAC is internet-facing or processes untrusted files—can elevate practical risk above the numerical CVSS score.

Frequently asked questions

What is the local access requirement, and does it apply to my environment?

The vulnerability requires an attacker to be able to invoke MP4Box with a crafted MP4 file. This typically means shell or file system access to the system running GPAC. However, if your application uses GPAC as a library to process user-uploaded files without additional validation, that upload path effectively grants an attacker the ability to trigger the flaw. If GPAC is only used in isolated batch processes with pre-validated files from trusted sources, risk is lower.

Is there a workaround if I cannot patch immediately?

Partial mitigations include disabling MP4Box or GPAC services if not essential, restricting file uploads to trusted users, implementing strict MP4 file format validation before passing files to GPAC, and running GPAC under low-privilege service accounts. None of these fully eliminate risk, so patching should remain your primary goal within a reasonable timeframe.

How do I know if my GPAC version is vulnerable?

Compare your GPAC commit hash or release version against commit b40ce70f5. If your version was released before the vulnerability was patched (commit f29f955f2a3b5e8e507caad3e52319f961bf37bf), you are likely vulnerable. Check the official GPAC repository or release notes for specific version numbers tied to these commits.

Can this vulnerability be exploited remotely?

No. The vulnerability explicitly requires local access, meaning an attacker must be able to run commands or place files on the target system. Remote exploitation is not possible unless GPAC is exposed through a web service that processes user-supplied files, in which case the remote upload effectively grants local file processing capability.

This analysis is based on publicly available vulnerability data and vendor advisories as of the publication date. CVSS scores and severity ratings are as published by CVE and NIST; context-specific risk may vary. Patch versions and commit hashes referenced herein should be verified against official GPAC sources before deployment. No exploit code or weaponized proof-of-concept details are included in this summary. Organizations should conduct their own risk assessment and testing in non-production environments before applying patches. SEC.co does not warrant the completeness or accuracy of third-party vendor information and recommends validating all technical details through primary sources. Source: NVD (public-domain), retrieved 2026-08-15. Analysis generated by SEC.co (claude-haiku-4-5).