CVE-2013-3939
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 · uneditedxnview.exe in XnView before 2.13 does not properly handle RLE strip lengths during processing of RGB files, which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via the RLE strip size field in a RGB file, which leads to an unexpected sign extension error and a heap-based buffer overflow.
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 confidenceXnView before version 2.13 contains a heap-based buffer overflow vulnerability in xnview.exe when processing RGB image files. The vulnerability stems from improper validation of RLE (Run-Length Encoding) strip lengths, where the strip size field in an RGB file triggers an unexpected sign extension error. This allows remote attackers to achieve arbitrary code execution by tricking users into opening specially crafted malicious RGB 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< 2.13CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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.
-
Locate XnView installationSearch for xnview.exe on the system using file explorer search or command: 'where xnview.exe' (Windows) or 'find / -name xnview' (Linux)Affected if xnview.exe is found on the system
-
Identify XnView versionRight-click xnview.exe, select Properties, then view the Details tab to find the File Version; alternatively, run 'xnview.exe -v' or check Help > About in the applicationAffected if version displayed is below 2.13
-
Confirm RGB file handling capabilityXnView includes RGB image parsing by default; verify the application can open image files by launching it and checking file association for .rgb extensionsAffected if XnView is capable of opening RGB files (default behavior)
-
Check for recent XnView usageReview recently opened files or check application logs for .rgb file access; on Windows, examine %APPDATA%\XnView\ for recent file historyAffected if user has recently opened RGB files with XnView
A system is affected if XnView version is found to be installed and is earlier than 2.13, as the heap overflow vulnerability in RGB file processing exists in all prior versions.
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 data2.13
Upgrade XnView to version 2.13 or later. Until patched, exercise extreme caution when opening RGB files from untrusted sources, as user interaction (opening the file) is sufficient to trigger the heap overflow.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-3939 — 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-2013-3939 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