CVE Vulnerabilities


Out-of-bounds Write

Published: Feb 16, 2012 | Modified: Apr 16, 2020
CVSS 3.x
CVSS 2.x

Heap-based buffer overflow in Google Chrome before 17.0.963.56 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service or possibly have unspecified other impact via a crafted Matroska video (aka MKV) file.


The software writes data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.

Affected Software

Name Vendor Start Version End Version
Chrome Google * *
Chromium-browser Ubuntu devel *
Chromium-browser Ubuntu lucid *
Chromium-browser Ubuntu maverick *
Chromium-browser Ubuntu natty *
Chromium-browser Ubuntu oneiric *
Chromium-browser Ubuntu precise *
Chromium-browser Ubuntu quantal *
Chromium-browser Ubuntu raring *
Chromium-browser Ubuntu saucy *
Chromium-browser Ubuntu trusty *
Chromium-browser Ubuntu utopic *
Chromium-browser Ubuntu vivid *
Chromium-browser Ubuntu wily *
Chromium-browser Ubuntu xenial *
Chromium-browser Ubuntu yakkety *
Qtwebkit-source Ubuntu devel *
Qtwebkit-source Ubuntu maverick *
Qtwebkit-source Ubuntu natty *
Qtwebkit-source Ubuntu oneiric *
Qtwebkit-source Ubuntu precise *
Qtwebkit-source Ubuntu quantal *
Qtwebkit-source Ubuntu raring *
Qtwebkit-source Ubuntu saucy *
Qtwebkit-source Ubuntu trusty *
Qtwebkit-source Ubuntu utopic *
Qtwebkit-source Ubuntu vivid *
Qtwebkit-source Ubuntu wily *
Qtwebkit-source Ubuntu xenial *
Qtwebkit-source Ubuntu yakkety *
Webkit Ubuntu hardy *
Webkit Ubuntu lucid *
Webkit Ubuntu maverick *
Webkit Ubuntu natty *
Webkit Ubuntu oneiric *
Webkit Ubuntu precise *
Webkit Ubuntu quantal *
Webkit Ubuntu raring *
Webkit Ubuntu saucy *
Webkitgtk Ubuntu utopic *
Webkitgtk Ubuntu vivid *

Potential Mitigations

  • Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.

  • For example, many languages that perform their own memory management, such as Java and Perl, are not subject to buffer overflows. Other languages, such as Ada and C#, typically provide overflow protection, but the protection can be disabled by the programmer.

  • Be wary that a language’s interface to native code may still be subject to overflows, even if the language itself is theoretically safe.

  • Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.

  • Examples include the Safe C String Library (SafeStr) by Messier and Viega [REF-57], and the Strsafe.h library from Microsoft [REF-56]. These libraries provide safer versions of overflow-prone string-handling functions.

  • Run or compile the software using features or extensions that automatically provide a protection mechanism that mitigates or eliminates buffer overflows.

  • For example, certain compilers and extensions provide automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are built into the compiled code. Examples include the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice.

  • Consider adhering to the following rules when allocating and managing an application’s memory:

  • Run or compile the software using features or extensions that randomly arrange the positions of a program’s executable and libraries in memory. Because this makes the addresses unpredictable, it can prevent an attacker from reliably jumping to exploitable code.

  • Examples include Address Space Layout Randomization (ASLR) [REF-58] [REF-60] and Position-Independent Executables (PIE) [REF-64].