FedoraOperating system · Fedoraproject
CVE-2016-7945
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 X.org libXi before 1.7.7 allow remote X servers to cause a denial of service (out-of-bounds memory access or infinite loop) via vectors involving length fields.
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 integer overflow vulnerabilities exist in X.org libXi library versions before 1.7.7. The vulnerabilities are triggered via malformed length fields in X protocol requests, which can cause out-of-bounds memory access or infinite loops, leading to denial of service.
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
FedoraOperating system
= 24= 25<= 1.7.6CVSS 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
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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.
-
Identify installed libXi versionRun 'rpm -q libXi' (RHEL/Fedora) or 'dpkg -l libxi6' (Debian/Ubuntu) to query the installed package version. On systems without package managers, check '/usr/lib/libXi.so.6' or similar library files and use 'strings' or 'objdump -p' to extract version info.Affected if The reported version is less than 1.7.7 (for example, 1.7.6, 1.7.5, 1.7.4, etc.) or the package is not found (which may indicate no vulnerability).
-
Confirm X Input extension (Xi) is in useCheck if X servers or X clients that use input devices are running. Look for X11 display servers (Xorg, XFree86) and applications that process input events. Use 'xdpyinfo' or examine running processes with 'ps aux | grep X' or 'xinput -list' to see if Xi-capable devices are present.Affected if X server with Xi extension support is active and clients are connecting to it, as the vulnerability triggers during X protocol request processing.
-
Inspect library linkageUse 'ldd' on X client applications or check '/etc/ld.so.conf' and run 'ldconfig -p | grep -i xi' to confirm libXi is loaded. Example: 'ldd /usr/bin/xinput | grep -i xi' shows if the application links against libXi.Affected if Any X application dynamically links to libXi, making it potentially reachable via malformed X protocol requests.
A system is affected if libXi version 1.7.6 or earlier is installed and X clients using the X Input extension are connecting to an X server, since the integer overflows in length field handling become reachable through network or local X protocol requests.
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 dataUpdate libXi to version 1.7.7 or later to patch the integer overflow vulnerabilities in length field handling.
Fix this in Fedora
Scoped from the published advisory
- 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-2016-7945 — 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-2016-7945 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