CVE-2007-3696
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedCA ERwin Data Model Validator (formerly AllFusion Data Model Validator) allows remote attackers to (1) cause a denial of service (application hang) via a malformed .EXP database file and (2) cause a denial of service (aaplication crash) via a crafted .EXP database file, which triggers a NULL dereference.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceCA ERwin Data Model Validator fails to properly validate malformed .EXP database files during import, leading to two distinct denial-of-service conditions: (1) application hang when processing a malformed file, and (2) application crash due to NULL pointer dereference when processing a crafted file. The vulnerability is remotely exploitable by tricking users into opening malicious .EXP files.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE dataall versionsCVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:N/I:N/A:C
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify if ERwin Data Model Validator is installedCheck system for ERwin Data Model Validator installation by searching for executables (e.g., 'erwin', 'DataModeler', 'DMValidator' in Program Files) or checking Add/Remove Programs for CA or Broadcom ERwin entriesAffected if ERwin Data Model Validator is present on the system
-
Verify the product versionLocate the installed executable (commonly in Program Files/CA or Program Files/Broadcom/ERwin) and check its file properties for version information, or run 'erwin -v' or similar command if availableAffected if Any version of ERwin Data Model Validator is installed (all versions are affected)
-
Check for .EXP file import functionalityLook for evidence that .EXP file import capability exists: search for .EXP file handlers, check application features/menus for import options, or examine file associations for .EXP extension in Windows registry under HKCR\.expAffected if The application supports importing .EXP database files
-
Inspect for recent crashes or hangs related to ERwinReview Windows Event Viewer Application logs for ERwin or Data Model Validator crash events, or check for ERwin crash dump files in application directoriesAffected if Crashes or hangs have occurred when processing .EXP files
A user is affected if ERwin Data Model Validator is installed and the application processes or has processed .EXP database files from potentially untrusted sources.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataRestrict handling of .EXP files from untrusted sources. Implement robust input validation and proper error handling in the .EXP file parsing code to prevent NULL dereferences and infinite loops. Consider adding file format validation before full parsing.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,960.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2007-3696 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2007-3696 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data