CVE-2014-9495
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 · uneditedHeap-based buffer overflow in the png_combine_row function in libpng before 1.5.21 and 1.6.x before 1.6.16, when running on 64-bit systems, might allow context-dependent attackers to execute arbitrary code via a "very wide interlaced" PNG image.
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 confidenceHeap-based buffer overflow in the png_combine_row function in libpng versions before 1.5.21 and 1.6.x before 1.6.16 on 64-bit systems, caused by improper handling of very wide interlaced PNG images, potentially allowing arbitrary code execution via heap memory corruption.
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<= 10.11.3<= 1.5.20= 1.6.0= 1.6.1= 1.6.2= 1.6.3= 1.6.4= 1.6.5= 1.6.6= 1.6.7= 1.6.8= 1.6.9= 1.6.10CVSS 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
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/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 libpng libraryRun 'ls /usr/lib/libpng*' or 'ldconfig -p | grep libpng' to find installed libpng files. On macOS, use 'brew list libpng' or check '/usr/local/lib/libpng*'.Affected if No libpng library is found (not vulnerable because library is not present)
-
Identify installed libpng versionRun 'pnglibconf.h' version check: 'grep PNG_LIBPNG_VER /usr/include/png.h' or 'png --version' if png command line tool is installed. Also check 'pkg-config --modversion libpng'.Affected if Version cannot be determined or is not one of the listed affected versions
-
Compare version to affected rangesParse the version number found in step 2. For 1.5.x branch: any version <= 1.5.20 is affected. For 1.6.x branch: versions 1.6.0 through 1.6.10 are affected.Affected if Installed version is 1.5.20 or earlier, OR is 1.6.0 through 1.6.10
-
Verify system architectureRun 'uname -m' or 'getconf LONG_BIT'. The vulnerability specifically affects 64-bit systems.Affected if System is 64-bit (x86_64, amd64, or LONG_BIT returns 64)
-
Confirm PNG processing capabilityCheck if applications or services on the system process PNG images, particularly interlaced PNGs. Inspect logs or application configs for PNG handling. The vulnerability triggers when processing interlaced PNG images.Affected if System processes or can process interlaced PNG images
System is affected if libpng version is 1.5.20 or earlier, or 1.6.0-1.6.10, running on a 64-bit architecture, and processes interlaced PNG images.
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 1.5.21 or later (for 1.5.x branch) or 1.6.16 or later (for 1.6.x branch), or apply vendor-provided security patches; validate the update in a test environment before production deployment.
- 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-2014-9495 — 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-2014-9495 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