CVE-2017-1000039
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 · uneditedFramadate version 1.0 is vulnerable to Formula Injection in the CSV Export resulting possible Information Disclosure and Code Execution
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 confidenceFramadate 1.0 contains a formula injection vulnerability in its CSV export functionality. User-supplied data is exported to CSV without sanitizing formula characters (=, +, -, @, tab), allowing attackers to inject spreadsheet formulas that can trigger information disclosure or arbitrary code execution when the exported file is opened in spreadsheet software.
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= 1.0CVSS 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
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/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.
-
Identify Framadate installationCheck your web server for Framadate installation directories or use web fingerprinting tools to detect the applicationAffected if Framadate is present on the server
-
Determine the installed versionLocate the version file or check the about page within the Framadate installation (typically in the admin or documentation files)Affected if The installed version is exactly 1.0 or falls within the 1.0.x range
-
Verify CSV export functionality existsLog in as a user, create a poll, and look for an export option that allows CSV format export of poll dataAffected if CSV export feature is available and accessible to users
-
Check for formula character sanitization in export codeExamine the source code file responsible for CSV export (typically in the export or admin module) and inspect how user data is handled before being written to CSV outputAffected if The code does not filter or escape characters =, +, -, @, or tab before inserting user data into CSV cells
-
Test CSV export for formula injectionCreate a poll with test data containing cells starting with = (equals sign) followed by a harmless formula like =1+1, then export to CSV and open the resulting file in a spreadsheet application to observe if the formula is evaluatedAffected if The exported CSV file displays evaluated formula results (like the number 2) instead of the literal text string beginning with =
You are affected if Framadate version 1.0 is installed and the CSV export feature is available without proper sanitization of formula-initiating characters in user-supplied poll data.
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 dataSanitize all data exported to CSV by escaping or filtering formula-initiating characters (=, +, -, @) at the point of export. Additionally, implement content security policies and warn users when opening exported files from untrusted sources.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,728.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-1000039 — 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-2017-1000039 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