FFMPEG v8.1.1 vulnerabilities · Issue #1272 · opencv/opencv-python · GitHub
Skip to content

FFMPEG v8.1.1 vulnerabilities #1272

Open

Description

@nicholascapo

The following vulnerabilities have been identified in the ffmpeg binaries shipped with version v5.0.0.93 of this package.

NAME SEVERITY VULNERABILITY INSTALLED FIXED IN
ffmpeg High CVE-2026-70632 v8.1.1 v9 
ffmpeg High CVE-2026-70628 v8.1.1 v9 
ffmpeg Medium CVE-2026-70631 v8.1.1 v9 
ffmpeg Medium CVE-2026-70629 v8.1.1 v9 
ffmpeg Medium CVE-2026-70630 v8.1.1 v9 

Files

  • libavcodec-c4204469.so.62.28.101
  • libavformat-4762a711.so.62.12.101
  • libavutil-befbbc48.so.60.26.101
  • libswresample-2dfded3b.so.6.3.101

References

Activity

  1. MDSALMANSHAMS commented on Sep 15, 2026

    @MDSALMANSHAMS
    Contributor

    Confirmed the 5 CVEs — all FIXED IN: v9, and specifically for CVE-2026-70632 that's not a floor, ffmpeg's own advisory scopes it to versions 4.4 through 9.0 exclusive, so no 8.x patch release covers it. The INSTALLED: v8.1.1 in the report is against the currently published wheel (5.0.0.93, uploaded 07-02); source on 5.x already carries 8.1.2 from #1249, which is still in-range for these.

    This one isn't a simple FFMPEG_VERSION bump like #1233/#1249 though, because of a dependency on opencv/opencv core, not just this repo:

    • ffmpeg 9.0 is an ABI break (all 7 libs re-versioned) and removed AVCodec::pix_fmts / AVCodec::supported_framerates, which cap_ffmpeg_hw.hpp / cap_ffmpeg_impl.hpp read directly.
    • That's fixed in core by videoio: fix build with FFmpeg 9 after AVCodec::pix_fmts removal opencv#29533 (merged 2026-08-11, routes through avcodec_get_supported_config()), but the 5.x submodule pin here is still 40738fb1 = the 5.0.0 tag (2026-06-05), from before that fix. Bumping just the Dockerfile ARG to 9.0 would break the build without also moving the submodule pin forward, and I don't see a tagged core release yet (4.14.0 on 07-19 is still the latest, also pre-#29533).

    @asmorkalov — is there a core release planned that picks up #29533, or is pinning the submodule to a post-08-11 commit acceptable here? Happy to put up the version bump (Dockerfiles + submodule pin) across the 7 build variants once that's clear. Same dependency applies to #1258.

  2. aremishevsky commented on Oct 6, 2026

    @aremishevsky

    Hi @asmorkalov do we have some updates on this?
    Thanks

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions