CVE-2017-11496
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 · uneditedStack buffer overflow in hasplms in Gemalto ACC (Admin Control Center), all versions ranging from HASP SRM 2.10 to Sentinel LDK 7.50, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via malformed ASN.1 streams in V2C and similar input files.
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 confidenceStack buffer overflow in hasplms licensing management service within Gemalto ACC allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via malformed ASN.1 data in V2C license ticket files and similar input. The vulnerability stems from insufficient bounds checking during ASN.1 stream parsing, leading to stack 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= 2.10= 3.0= 7.1= 7.50CVSS 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.
-
Check if Sentinel LDK RTE is installedLook for Sentinel LDK Runtime Environment installation on the system. This may be visible in installed programs list, or check for hasplms.exe process or service.Affected if Sentinel LDK RTE is installed and the hasplms service/process is present
-
Identify the installed version of Sentinel LDK RTEQuery the installed version of the Sentinel LDK software. Common methods include checking program files directory for version info, using vendor-provided version detection tools, or checking registry keys if available.Affected if The installed version matches 2.10, 3.0, 7.1, or 7.50 exactly
-
Verify if hasplms service is runningCheck if the hasplms.exe process or Windows service is active. This is the licensing management service that contains the vulnerable ASN.1 parsing code.Affected if The hasplms service is running and processing license files
-
Determine if V2C license ticket files are being processedCheck if the system processes V2C license ticket files, which is the attack vector for this vulnerability. This may be visible in logs, temporary files, or active license operations.Affected if The system imports or processes V2C license ticket files from external sources
You are affected if Sentinel LDK RTE version 2.10, 3.0, 7.1, or 7.50 is installed and the hasplms service is running with the ability to process V2C license files.
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 dataApply vendor patches for Sentinel LDK 7.50 and later versions; restrict network access to hasplms services; validate and sanitize V2C files before processing; consider upgrading to latest Sentinel LDK release which should contain the fix.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,960.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-11496 — 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-2017-11496 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