CVE-2017-1000174
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 · uneditedIn SWFTools, an address access exception was found in swfdump swf_GetBits().
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 · moderate confidenceA memory access violation exists in SWFTools' swfdump utility within the swf_GetBits() function. This appears to be an out-of-bounds or invalid address access when parsing SWF files, potentially allowing crafted input to trigger the exception.
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 dataall versionsCVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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.
-
Verify swfdump utility is presentCheck if the swfdump binary exists on the system by running 'which swfdump' or 'command -v swfdump'Affected if The swfdump binary is found on the system
-
Confirm the binary belongs to SWFToolsRun 'swfdump --version' or 'swfdump -h' and verify the output identifies the tool as part of the SWFTools packageAffected if The binary is identified as swfdump from SWFTools
-
Identify if swfdump processes untrusted SWF filesReview any scripts, pipelines, or automated processes that invoke swfdump to parse SWF input, or check user directories for recent swfdump usageAffected if swfdump is used to parse SWF files from untrusted or external sources
-
Assess exposure levelDetermine whether swfdump is accessible to untrusted users or exposed via web-facing services that process SWF uploadsAffected if Untrusted users can trigger swfdump to process arbitrary SWF files
If swfdump from SWFTools is installed and is used to parse SWF files, the environment is affected since all versions of Swftools contain this vulnerability in the swf_GetBits() function.
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 to a patched version of SWFTools that addresses the address access issue in swf_GetBits(). If no patched version exists, avoid processing untrusted SWF files with swfdump.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,512.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-1000174 — 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-2017-1000174 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