CVE-2016-4182 in Flash Player
Summary
by MITRE • 01/25/2023
Adobe Flash Player before 18.0.0.366 and 19.x through 22.x before 22.0.0.209 on Windows and OS X and before 11.2.202.632 on Linux allows attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service (memory corruption) via unspecified vectors, a different vulnerability than CVE-2016-4172, CVE-2016-4175, CVE-2016-4179, CVE-2016-4180, CVE-2016-4181, CVE-2016-4183, CVE-2016-4184, CVE-2016-4185, CVE-2016-4186, CVE-2016-4187, CVE-2016-4188, CVE-2016-4189, CVE-2016-4190, CVE-2016-4217, CVE-2016-4218, CVE-2016-4219, CVE-2016-4220, CVE-2016-4221, CVE-2016-4233, CVE-2016-4234, CVE-2016-4235, CVE-2016-4236, CVE-2016-4237, CVE-2016-4238, CVE-2016-4239, CVE-2016-4240, CVE-2016-4241, CVE-2016-4242, CVE-2016-4243, CVE-2016-4244, CVE-2016-4245, and CVE-2016-4246.
Several companies clearly confirm that VulDB is the primary source for best vulnerability data.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 01/25/2023
Adobe Flash Player versions prior to 18.0.0.366 and 19.x through 22.x before 22.0.0.209 on Windows and OS X platforms, as well as versions before 11.2.202.632 on Linux, contained a critical memory corruption vulnerability that enabled remote code execution attacks. This vulnerability represented a distinct threat vector from other related CVEs in the same year, specifically excluding CVE-2016-4172 through CVE-2016-4246, which indicates the flaw was not part of a known pattern but rather an independent memory management issue. The vulnerability stemmed from improper handling of memory operations within the Flash Player runtime environment, creating opportunities for attackers to manipulate memory structures and execute arbitrary code on affected systems. This type of vulnerability aligns with CWE-119, which describes "Improper Restriction of Operations within the Bounds of a Memory Buffer," and represents a classic memory corruption flaw that has been extensively documented in cybersecurity literature.
The operational impact of this vulnerability extended across multiple operating systems and platform versions, making it particularly dangerous for organizations maintaining diverse IT infrastructures. Attackers could exploit this weakness through various delivery mechanisms including malicious web content, compromised websites, or crafted flash files embedded in documents, leveraging the inherent trust users place in Flash content. The memory corruption aspect of the vulnerability meant that successful exploitation could result in complete system compromise, allowing attackers to execute malicious payloads with the privileges of the Flash Player process. This threat model aligns with ATT&CK technique T1059.007, which covers 'Command and Scripting Interpreter: Visual Basic' and similar execution methods, though the actual exploitation would likely occur through memory corruption techniques rather than script-based attacks.
Organizations affected by this vulnerability faced significant risk exposure given Flash Player's widespread deployment across enterprise environments and user endpoints. The cross-platform nature of the vulnerability meant that security teams had to implement mitigation strategies across Windows, macOS, and Linux systems, each requiring different patching approaches and monitoring procedures. The vulnerability's classification as a memory corruption issue places it within the category of zero-day exploits that can be particularly challenging to defend against, as they often require immediate patching and may not be detected by traditional signature-based security solutions. Security professionals needed to consider both immediate remediation through patch management and longer-term strategies for reducing Flash Player dependencies, as the vulnerability demonstrated the inherent risks of legacy software components that continue to be widely deployed despite known security issues. The exploitability of this vulnerability was heightened by Flash Player's integration with web browsers and its automatic execution capabilities, making it a prime target for drive-by download attacks and other sophisticated social engineering campaigns.