CVE-2011-0408
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 · uneditedpngrtran.c in libpng 1.5.x before 1.5.1 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (application crash) or possibly execute arbitrary code via a crafted palette-based PNG image that triggers a buffer overflow, related to the png_do_expand_palette function, the png_do_rgb_to_gray function, and an integer underflow. NOTE: some of these details are obtained from third party information.
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 libpng 1.5.x before 1.5.1 in pngrtran.c allows remote attackers to cause denial of service or possibly execute arbitrary code via crafted palette-based PNG images. The flaw exists in the png_do_expand_palette and png_do_rgb_to_gray functions due to an integer underflow that leads to improper buffer handling.
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= 1.5.0CVSS 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
- 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.
-
Identify installed libpng versionRun 'pnglibconf --version' or check the library file version with 'ldd --version' or inspect /usr/include/png.h for the version define (PNG_LIBPNG_VER)Affected if The version reported is exactly 1.5.0 (reported as 1500 or 15.0.x in different formats)
-
Locate the libpng library fileFind libpng shared library with 'find /usr -name "libpng*.so*" 2>/dev/null' or check package manager output with 'dpkg -l | grep libpng' or 'rpm -qa | grep libpng'Affected if The installed package version matches 1.5.0 specifically, as only this version is affected
-
Confirm the vulnerable source file is presentCheck if pngrtran.c exists in the installed libpng source or development headers under the source/ directoryAffected if The source file pngrtran.c is present and corresponds to libpng 1.5.0
-
Determine if palette-based PNG processing occursInspect application logs or code for handling of PNG files, particularly those with color type 3 (palette-based) - check file headers or use 'file *.png' to identify palette-based imagesAffected if The environment processes palette-based PNG images (color type 3) which trigger the vulnerable png_do_expand_palette and png_do_rgb_to_gray functions
You are affected only if libpng version 1.5.0 is installed AND your environment processes palette-based PNG images from untrusted sources.
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 libpng to version 1.5.1 or later to patch the integer underflow and buffer overflow vulnerability. Validate and sanitize any palette-based PNG input from untrusted sources.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $2,752.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2011-0408 — 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-2011-0408 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