CVE-2008-5078
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 · uneditedMultiple buffer overflows in the (1) recognize_eps_file function (src/psgen.c) and (2) tilde_subst function (src/util.c) in GNU enscript 1.6.1, and possibly earlier, might allow remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via an epsf escape sequence with a long filename.
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 confidenceBuffer overflow vulnerability in GNU enscript 1.6.1 where the recognize_eps_file function in src/psgen.c and tilde_subst function in src/util.c fail to properly bounds-check filenames when processing epsf escape sequences. A long filename in an epsf escape sequence can overflow a fixed-size buffer, potentially allowing arbitrary code execution.
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= 1.6.1CVSS 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
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
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.
-
Check if GNU enscript is installedRun `enscript --version` or `which enscript` to verify the program is present on the systemAffected if enscript is not installed, the system is not affected by this specific CVE
-
Confirm the installed version is 1.6.1Examine the version output from `enscript --version`. The CVE states only version 1.6.1 is affectedAffected if The installed version is exactly 1.6.1, proceed to the next check; if version differs, the system is not affected by this CVE
-
Determine if EPS file processing is usedReview any scripts, workflows, or configurations that invoke enscript to process EPS (Encapsulated PostScript) files or use epsf escape sequencesAffected if The environment processes EPS files using enscript with epsf escape sequences containing filenames, the system meets the vulnerability condition; if EPS processing is not performed, the flaw is not reachable
The system is affected only if enscript version 1.6.1 is installed AND it processes EPS files using epsf escape sequences with long filenames.
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 dataUpgrade to a patched version of GNU enscript. If upgrading is not immediately feasible, avoid processing untrusted EPS files and implement input validation to limit filename lengths before passing to these functions.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2008-5078 — 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-2008-5078 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