CVE-2009-0184
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 torrent parsing implementation in Free Download Manager (FDM) 2.5 Build 758 and 3.0 Build 844 allow remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via (1) a long file name within a torrent file, (2) a long tracker URL in a torrent file, or (3) a long comment in a torrent file.
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 confidenceMultiple buffer overflow vulnerabilities exist in Free Download Manager's torrent parsing implementation when handling overly long strings in three fields: file names, tracker URLs, and comments within .torrent files. The lack of proper bounds checking allows remote attackers to overwrite stack memory and execute arbitrary code by tricking users into opening specially crafted torrent 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 data= 2.5= 3.0CVSS 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.
-
Identify Free Download Manager versionCheck the installed Free Download Manager version on the system (typically via Add/Remove Programs, the application's Help > About dialog, or the executable's file properties)Affected if The installed version is 2.5 or 3.0 - these are the only affected versions listed in the CVE
-
Confirm torrent file handling is usedVerify that the Free Download Manager installation handles .torrent files - this is the application's core functionality for version 2.5 and 3.0Affected if The software processes .torrent files, which is the default behavior for these versions since the vulnerability is in the torrent parsing implementation
-
Assess file opening riskDetermine whether users in the environment open .torrent files from external or untrusted sources, as exploitation requires a user to open a specially crafted malicious .torrent fileAffected if Users routinely open .torrent files from untrusted or unknown sources, which is the attack vector for triggering the buffer overflow
You are affected only if Free Download Manager version 2.5 or 3.0 is installed AND users open specially crafted .torrent files from untrusted sources - the vulnerability cannot be triggered without user interaction to open a malicious 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.
From vendor dataUsers should avoid opening torrent files from untrusted sources. Since FDM 3.0 is no longer maintained, organizations should migrate to actively supported torrent clients or implement application whitelisting to block untrusted executable file handling.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 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 $7,808.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2009-0184 — 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-2009-0184 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