CVE-2007-4750
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 · uneditedUnspecified vulnerability in RemoteDocs R-Viewer before 1.6.3768 allows user-assisted remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted RDZ archive in which the first file has an executable extension.
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 confidenceThis is a file parsing vulnerability in RemoteDocs R-Viewer where the application fails to properly validate files within a crafted RDZ archive. When the first file in the archive has an executable extension (such as .exe, .bat, .com), the application can be tricked into executing arbitrary code. This is a classic example of a type of zip slip or archive traversal vulnerability combined with insufficient extension validation.
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 data<= 1.6.2836CVSS 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
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/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.
-
Confirm RemoteDocs R-Viewer installationLook for R-Viewer in the Windows Start Menu, Program Files folder, or check registry under HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Uninstall for entries named 'RemoteDocs R Viewer' or 'R-Viewer'Affected if RemoteDocs R-Viewer is installed on the system
-
Identify installed versionRight-click the main R-Viewer executable (commonly RViewer.exe), select Properties, and view the Version tab. Alternatively, check the registry key under the uninstall entry for the version stringAffected if The version displayed is 1.6.2836 or lower (any version up to and including 1.6.2836)
-
Verify RDZ file handling is presentSearch for file associations or registered handlers for .rdz extension in Windows registry under HKCR\.rdz or check if R-Viewer includes RDZ parsing modules in its installation directoryAffected if The application is configured to process or open RDZ archive files
-
Check for recent RDZ file processingReview Windows Event Logs (Application log), recent documents, or file history for evidence of .rdz files having been opened with R-ViewerAffected if Users have opened RDZ files from the local system or received files using this application
The environment is affected if RemoteDocs R-Viewer version 1.6.2836 or lower is installed and the application is used to open RDZ archive files, since the vulnerability requires user interaction to open a crafted RDZ file.
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.
dbcve · scopedUpgrade RemoteDocs R-Viewer to version 1.6.3768 or later. Do not open RDZ archive files from untrusted sources, as user interaction (opening the file) is required for exploitation.
RemoteDocs R-Viewer version 1.6.3768 or later
- 1. Verify current installation of RemoteDocs R-Viewer by checking the installed version in the application or system registry
- 2. If version is 1.6.2836 or lower, download the updated version 1.6.3768 or later from the official vendor website or trusted distribution channel
- 3. Backup all existing RDZ archives and configuration files before performing the upgrade
- 4. Uninstall the current version of RemoteDocs R-Viewer
- 5. Install version 1.6.3768 or the latest available stable release
- 6. Verify the new version number matches the patched release
- 7. Test that RDZ archives open correctly in the updated version
- 8. Monitor for any security events or anomalies after the upgrade
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,696.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2007-4750 — 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-2007-4750 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