CVE-2009-0792
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 integer overflows in icc.c in the International Color Consortium (ICC) Format library (aka icclib), as used in Ghostscript 8.64 and earlier and Argyll Color Management System (CMS) 1.0.3 and earlier, allow context-dependent attackers to cause a denial of service (heap-based buffer overflow and application crash) or possibly execute arbitrary code by using a device file for a translation request that operates on a crafted image file and targets a certain "native color space," related to an ICC profile in a (1) PostScript or (2) PDF file with embedded images. NOTE: this issue exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2009-0583.
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 confidenceInteger overflows in icc.c within the ICC Format library (icclib) allow heap-based buffer overflows when parsing crafted ICC profiles embedded in PostScript or PDF files. The overflows occur during device file translation operations targeting certain native color spaces, potentially enabling arbitrary code execution. This issue is an incomplete fix of CVE-2009-0583.
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<= 8.64= 5.50= 7.05= 7.07= 8.0.1= 8.15= 8.15.2= 8.54= 8.56= 8.57= 8.61= 8.62<= 1.0.3= 0.1.0= 0.2.0= 0.2.1= 0.2.2= 0.3.0= 0.6.0= 0.7.0= 1.0.0= 1.0.2CVSS 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.
-
Check Ghostscript versionRun 'gs --version' or check the installed ghostscript package version using your system package manager (dpkg, rpm, etc.)Affected if The installed version matches one of the affected versions: 5.50, 7.05, 7.07, 8.0.1, 8.15, 8.15.2, 8.54, 8.56, 8.57, 8.61, 8.62, or any version <= 8.64
-
Check ArgyllCMS versionRun 'tiffdiff -v' or check the installed argyllcms package version using your system package managerAffected if The installed version matches one of the affected versions: 0.1.0, 0.2.0, 0.2.1, 0.2.2, 0.3.0, 0.6.0, 0.7.0, 1.0.0, 1.0.2, or any version <= 1.0.3
-
Identify if ICC profile processing is in useSearch your system for ICC profile handling tools such as icclib, icc2ps, or any PDF/PostScript processing utilities that utilize the ICC library. Check for applications that process color profiles from untrusted sources.Affected if ICC profile processing tools are present and can be invoked to parse profiles from PostScript or PDF files
-
Audit PDF/PostScript processing workflowsReview any scripts or applications that automatically process PDF or PostScript files, particularly those that handle embedded ICC color profiles. Look for commands that use Ghostscript or ArgyllCMS utilities to convert or translate color spaces.Affected if Automated or user-accessible workflows exist that process untrusted PostScript or PDF files with ICC profile translation enabled
A system is affected if it runs any version of Ghostscript <= 8.64 or ArgyllCMS <= 1.0.3 AND processes PostScript/PDF files containing ICC profiles through the icclib library.
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 Ghostscript to version 8.64+ and Argyll CMS to version 1.0.3+ with patched icclib. Alternatively, implement strict validation of ICC profile data before processing and restrict processing of untrusted PostScript/PDF files in sandboxed environments.
Ghostscript 8.65+ or Argyll CMS 1.0.4+
- 1. Identify which affected product (Ghostscript or Argyll CMS) is in use in your environment.
- 2. For Ghostscript: Check the installed version using 'gs --version' or 'gs -v'.
- 3. For Argyll CMS: Check the installed version using 'refine --version' or reviewing the package version.
- 4. If Ghostscript <= 8.64 is installed, upgrade to Ghostscript 8.65 or later.
- 5. If Argyll CMS <= 1.0.3 is installed, upgrade to Argyll CMS 1.0.4 or later.
- 6. Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the new version number.
- 7. Test that PostScript and PDF processing functionality continues to work correctly with the upgraded version.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing10.0 h
- Review / QA6.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $9,504.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2009-0792 — 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 sources- secunia.com
- secunia.com
- lists.opensuse.org
- lists.opensuse.org
- secunia.com
- secunia.com
- secunia.com
- secunia.com
- secunia.com
- secunia.com
- secunia.com
- security.gentoo.org
- sunsolve.sun.com
- support.avaya.com
- wiki.rpath.com
- www.mandriva.com
- www.mandriva.com
- www.redhat.com
- www.redhat.com
- www.securityfocus.com
- www.vupen.com
- bugzilla.redhat.com
- exchange.xforce.ibmcloud.com
- oval.cisecurity.org
- usn.ubuntu.com
- www.redhat.com
- www.redhat.com
- www.redhat.com
- www.redhat.com
- nvd.nist.gov
Practitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2009-0792 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