dbcve.org
EdApplication · Gnu

CVE-2008-3916

HIGH · 9.3 CVSS v2.0 Published 2008-09-04
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
Heap-based buffer overflow in the strip_escapes function in signal.c in GNU ed before 1.0 allows context-dependent or user-assisted attackers to execute arbitrary code via a long filename. NOTE: since ed itself does not typically run with special privileges, this issue only crosses privilege boundaries when ed is invoked as a third-party component.

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 · moderate confidence

Heap-based buffer overflow in the strip_escapes function in signal.c of GNU ed before v1.0 allows arbitrary code execution via a specially crafted long filename. The vulnerability occurs during filename processing where insufficient bounds checking on the heap-allocated buffer leads to overflow.

MitigationUpgrade GNU ed to version 1.0 or later to obtain the patched strip_escapes function that properly bounds-checks input strings.

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
EdApplication
Affected:= 0.2= 0.3= 0.4= 0.5= 0.6= 0.7= 0.8= 0.9

CVSS 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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Check installed GNU ed version
    Run `ed --version` or `ed -V` to display the version information
    Affected if The version displayed is 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, or 0.9
  2. Confirm vulnerable component location
    Check if the binary includes signal.c by running `strings /path/to/ed | grep strip_escapes` or reviewing source code for the function in signal.c
    Affected if The strip_escapes function exists in signal.c and was not patched with bounds checking
  3. Verify filename processing usage
    GNU ed uses strip_escapes when processing filenames provided to commands like 'e' (edit) or 'r' (read) - the vulnerability triggers when processing a specially crafted long filename
    Affected if The version is in the affected range and the application processes user-supplied filenames through strip_escapes

A user is affected if GNU ed version 0.2 through 0.9 is installed and processes filenames through the unpatched strip_escapes function in signal.c

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 · scoped
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Upgrade GNU ed to version 1.0 or later to obtain the patched strip_escapes function that properly bounds-checks input strings.

Recommended fix High confidence

GNU ed 1.0 or later

  1. Identify the current version of GNU ed installed (e.g., run 'ed --version' or check package manager)
  2. Upgrade GNU ed to version 1.0 or later using your system's package manager or from source
  3. Verify the new version is installed correctly by running 'ed --version'
Caveat Minimal; version 1.0 was a stable release addressing this and other issues, but verify critical editing workflows if migrating from pre-1.0 versions

Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.

Fix this in Ed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation1.0 h
  • Implementation1.0 h
  • Testing2.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
5.0 hours of engineering $860
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,376.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2008-3916 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2008-3916 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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