CVE-2026-53702: GStreamer H.265 Parser Stack Buffer Overflow
A flaw in GStreamer's H.265 video codec parser allows a specially crafted video file to trigger a crash or memory corruption on systems that process it. The bug occurs when the parser mishandles internal buffer size calculations during video stream analysis, writing data beyond allocated memory on the stack. An attacker could distribute a malicious video file that crashes applications or services using this library, but direct code execution is not indicated by the vulnerability mechanics.
Source data · NVD / CISA · public domain
- CVSS
- 3.1 · 6.5 MEDIUM · CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
- Weaknesses (CWE)
- CWE-787
- Affected products
- 0 configuration(s)
- Published / Modified
- 2026-06-11 / 2026-06-17
NVD description (verbatim)
A stack buffer overflow flaw was found in the GStreamer H.265 codec parser library (gst-plugins-bad). When parsing a buffering period SEI message, the parser uses an incorrect loop bound derived from cpb_cnt_minus1[i] (the loop index) instead of the sub-layer 0 CPB count cpb_cnt_minus1[0] from the referenced Sequence Parameter Set. A crafted H.265 video file or stream can cause the parser to write beyond the bounds of stack-allocated CPB delay arrays, resulting in a crash or potential stack memory corruption.
2 reference(s) · View on NVD →
SEC.co analysis · AI-assisted, reviewed against source
Technical summary
CVE-2026-53702 is a stack buffer overflow in gst-plugins-bad's H.265 SEI (Supplemental Enhancement Information) buffering period message parser. The root cause is an off-by-one or incorrect loop boundary condition: the parser references cpb_cnt_minus1[i] (the current loop index) to determine the size of CPB (Coded Picture Buffer) delay arrays, when it should consistently use cpb_cnt_minus1[0] from the Sequence Parameter Set. This causes the loop to iterate beyond the bounds of stack-allocated arrays, writing out-of-bounds data. The vulnerability is triggered during the parsing of a buffering period SEI message in a crafted H.265 bitstream, making it reachable via any application that decodes untrusted video input using the vulnerable library.
Business impact
Organizations deploying video processing services—including video transcoding, streaming platforms, video conferencing systems, and content management systems—face denial-of-service risk. A crafted video file uploaded by an attacker or received from an untrusted source can crash the video processing daemon, disrupting service availability. While privilege escalation or remote code execution is not established, the stack memory corruption could potentially be leveraged by an advanced adversary in combination with other techniques. Media ingest pipelines and user-facing video upload features are the highest-risk touchpoints.
Affected systems
Any application or service using GStreamer's gst-plugins-bad library (the 'bad' plugins collection) for H.265/HEVC video decoding is affected. This includes Linux distributions, embedded systems, video editing software, streaming platforms, and custom media applications linked against vulnerable versions of the library. The vulnerability requires the video to be actively parsed by the vulnerable code path; passive storage of H.265 files does not pose risk until they are processed.
Exploitability
Exploitation requires distribution of a crafted H.265 video file or stream and requires user interaction (or system processing) to trigger parsing of that media. The attack surface is broad for services that accept video uploads or process untrusted video sources. However, generating a suitable malicious bitstream requires understanding of the H.265 standard and the specific parser logic, making casual exploitation unlikely. No public proof-of-concept or weaponized tooling is known as of the publication date. The CVSS score of 6.5 reflects moderate severity: network-accessible attack vector, no privilege requirement, and user interaction required, with availability impact (crash) as the primary threat.
Remediation
Patch gst-plugins-bad to the version released in response to this CVE. Verify the patch version against the official GStreamer security advisory. Organizations should prioritize patching systems that accept video uploads, run video transcoding services, or process user-supplied media. In environments where patching is delayed, restrict video processing to trusted sources and implement file type validation at the ingestion layer.
Patch guidance
Check the official GStreamer project security advisories and release notes for the patched version of gst-plugins-bad that addresses CVE-2026-53702. Update gst-plugins-bad and its dependencies through your distribution's package manager or by recompiling from source. Verify the patch by confirming the buffering period SEI parser now correctly uses cpb_cnt_minus1[0] as the loop bound. Test patched systems with sample H.265 files to ensure normal video playback is not affected. For containerized or embedded deployments, rebuild container images and update base system images to include the patched library version.
Detection guidance
Monitor for crash dumps or segmentation faults in GStreamer processes, particularly gst-launch or gstreamer-based services, coinciding with ingestion of new or untrusted video files. Inspect application logs for parser errors related to buffering period SEI messages. If your organization uses a SIEM, correlate video upload events with GStreamer process termination events. Network-level detection is limited without deep packet inspection of video streams; focus on host-based signals (process crashes, core dumps) as the primary indicator.
Why prioritize this
This vulnerability should be prioritized if your organization operates video processing pipelines, accepts user video uploads, or runs streaming services. It sits at the intersection of accessible attack surface (network-reachable video parsers) and moderate impact (denial of service). Threat actors have demonstrated interest in media parsing vulnerabilities as a low-friction attack vector against services. The MEDIUM severity and lack of KEV status should not lead to deprioritization for organizations with significant video processing infrastructure.
Risk score, explained
The CVSS 3.1 score of 6.5 (MEDIUM) reflects: (1) Network-accessible attack vector—any video source can be attacked; (2) Low attack complexity—no special conditions required; (3) No privilege escalation required; (4) High availability impact from a crash; (5) No confidentiality or integrity impact. The score does not account for the possibility of more sophisticated exploitation through stack memory corruption, which could be higher in advanced threat models but is not currently established. Organizations with high-criticality video processing systems should treat this as high-priority despite the MEDIUM label.
Frequently asked questions
Can this vulnerability be exploited without user interaction?
The vulnerability requires parsing of a malicious H.265 bitstream, which necessitates either a user opening/uploading a file or a system being configured to automatically process video from an untrusted source. A closed system that only processes signed, internally-sourced video has reduced risk.
What is the difference between cpb_cnt_minus1[i] and cpb_cnt_minus1[0]?
cpb_cnt_minus1[0] represents the CPB count for sub-layer 0 in the Sequence Parameter Set and is the authoritative value. cpb_cnt_minus1[i] is a per-iteration loop variable that should not be used as an array bounds check. The bug uses the wrong variable, causing the loop to read uninitialized or out-of-bounds data.
Does this affect H.264 or other video codecs?
This specific vulnerability affects only the H.265/HEVC parser in gst-plugins-bad. H.264, VP8, VP9, and other codecs use different parser paths and are not affected by this flaw. However, organizations should audit all codec parsers for similar buffer boundary issues.
What is the difference between a crash and memory corruption in terms of exploit risk?
A crash causes denial of service but is easily detected. Memory corruption (writing to uncontrolled stack locations) could potentially be chained with other vulnerabilities to achieve code execution, but that is not demonstrated for this CVE. The primary risk remains availability impact unless further exploitation is discovered.
This analysis is based on available information as of the publication date (2026-06-11) and the CVE description provided. No official vendor patch version numbers were available at time of analysis; verify patch versions against the official GStreamer security advisory before deployment. The possibility of stack memory corruption being leveraged for more severe attacks has not been ruled out but is not confirmed by current evidence. This is not legal, procurement, or compliance advice. Organizations must conduct their own risk assessment based on their specific use of GStreamer and video processing infrastructure. Source: NVD (public-domain), retrieved 2026-07-20. Analysis generated by SEC.co (claude-haiku-4-5).
Weaknesses (CWE)
Related vulnerabilities
- CVE-2025-10238MEDIUMThinkPad BIOS Out-of-Bounds Write, SMM Code Execution Risk
- CVE-2025-59614MEDIUMQualcomm Memory Corruption in RNG Command Handling
- CVE-2026-10114MEDIUMOpen5GS Out-of-Bounds Write in NF Profile Parser
- CVE-2026-10999MEDIUMGoogle Chrome ANGLE Integer Overflow Information Disclosure
- CVE-2026-11090MEDIUMChrome ANGLE Memory Leak Enables Cross-Origin Data Theft
- CVE-2026-12298MEDIUMMemory Safety Vulnerability in Firefox and Thunderbird
- CVE-2026-20453MEDIUMMediaTek geniezone Out-of-Bounds Write Privilege Escalation
- CVE-2026-20456MEDIUMMediaTek WLAN Driver Out-of-Bounds Write DoS