CVE-2017-12473
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 · uneditedccnl_ccntlv_bytes2pkt in CCN-lite allows context-dependent attackers to cause a denial of service (application crash) via vectors involving packets with "wrong L values."
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 confidenceIn CCN-lite, the ccnl_ccntlv_bytes2pkt function fails to properly validate length fields (L values) in CCN TLV-encoded packets during parsing. When processing packets with malformed or incorrect L values, the function triggers an out-of-bounds memory access leading to application crash. This is exploitable remotely without authentication.
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< 2.0.0CVSS 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
- 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.
-
Check if CCN-lite is installedRun 'which ccn-lite' or 'which ccnlite' or search for ccnl related binaries in common paths like /usr/bin/, /usr/local/bin/. Also check if linked against libccnl via 'ldd' on any dependent applications.Affected if CCN-lite binaries or libraries are present on the system
-
Identify the CCN-lite versionRun 'ccn-lite-ctrl -v' or 'ccnl-core -v' or check the package version via your system's package manager (dpkg -l, rpm -qi, or equivalent). If built from source, check the version in the source directory or git tags.Affected if The installed version is less than 2.0.0 (e.g., 1.0.x, 0.x.x, or any version string not starting with 2.x or higher)
-
Verify the vulnerable function existsIf CCN-lite is built from source, inspect the source file containing ccnl_ccntlv_bytes2pkt (typically in src/ccnl-tlv.c or similar). Check if the function handles L value validation with bounds checking before memory operations.Affected if The function is present and lacks proper bounds checking on TLV length fields against actual packet size
-
Confirm packet processing is enabledCheck configuration files or command-line parameters that enable CCN TLV packet parsing. Look for flags like -t or modes that enable TLV encoding. Review any custom packet handler implementations that call ccnl_ccntlv_bytes2pkt.Affected if The system is configured to parse incoming CCN TLV-encoded packets or acts as a forwarder/receiver for CCN traffic
You are affected if CCN-lite is installed with a version below 2.0.0 and the system processes CCN TLV-encoded packets.
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 data2.0.0
Update CCN-lite to a version that properly validates TLV length fields before use in memory operations. Implement bounds checking on L values against actual packet length and handle parsing failures gracefully.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-12473 — 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-2017-12473 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