CVE-2017-12732
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 · uneditedA Stack-based Buffer Overflow issue was discovered in GE CIMPLICITY Versions 9.0 and prior. A function reads a packet to indicate the next packet length. The next packet length is not verified, allowing a buffer overwrite that could lead to an arbitrary remote 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 confidenceA stack-based buffer overflow vulnerability exists in GE CIMPLICITY Versions 9.0 and prior. The software reads a packet field indicating the next packet length without validating it, allowing an attacker to supply an oversized length value that overwrites adjacent stack memory. This can enable arbitrary remote code execution on the affected system.
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<= 9.0CVSS 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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- High
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:A/AC:H/PR:L/UI:R/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.
-
Verify GE CIMPLICITY installation existsCheck for CIMPLICITY installation directories (typically C:\Program Files\GE Intelligent Platforms\Proficy CIMPLICITY\ or C:\ProgramData\GE\CIMPLICITY\) and look for cimService.exe or related executable files.Affected if The software is not installed on the system.
-
Identify installed CIMPLICITY versionRight-click on cimService.exe in the installation folder, select Properties, then go to the Details tab to view the File Version. Alternatively, check the Windows Registry under HKLM\SOFTWARE\GE Intelligent Platforms\Proficy CIMPLICITY\CurrentVersion for the Version value.Affected if The installed version is 9.0 or any version lower than 9.0.
-
Confirm the CimService is runningOpen Windows Task Manager or Services console and look for a service named 'CimService' or check if process cimService.exe is running.Affected if The vulnerable service is active on the system.
-
Check for exposed CIMPLICITY network portsUse netstat -an or a network port scanner to check if ports commonly used by CIMPLICITY (typically TCP 11112, 11113, or custom configured ports) are listening on network interfaces accessible to untrusted users.Affected if The CIMPLICITY service ports are exposed to untrusted networks or the internet.
A system is affected if GE CIMPLICITY version 9.0 or lower is installed with the CimService running and accessible to network attackers.
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 GE CIMPLICITY that addresses this vulnerability. If upgrading is not immediately feasible, network segmentation and restricting access to CIMPLICITY ports can reduce exposure to remote attacks.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA6.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,832.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-12732 — 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-2017-12732 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