CVE-2017-12958
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 · uneditedThere is an illegal address access in the function output_hex() in data/data-out.c of the libpspp library in GNU PSPP before 1.0.1 that will lead to remote denial of service.
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 confidenceAn illegal address access vulnerability exists in the output_hex() function in data/data-out.c of the libpspp library in GNU PSPP before version 1.0.1. The function improperly handles memory addresses, leading to an out-of-bounds access that can be triggered remotely to cause a denial of service.
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= 0.11.0CVSS 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 installed GNU PSPP versionRun 'pspp --version' or 'pspp -v' to display the version numberAffected if Version is 0.11.0 or any version lower than 1.0.1
-
Check libpspp library versionRun 'dpkg -l libpspp*' (Debian) or 'rpm -qa | grep pspp' (Red Hat) to list installed libpspp packagesAffected if Package version is below 1.0.1
-
Verify the vulnerable binary existsLocate the pspp binary with 'which pspp' and check its build information using 'pspp --help' or examining the binary's metadataAffected if The binary is present and corresponds to an affected version
-
Confirm data output functionality is in useReview if the system processes PSPP syntax files or data files that invoke output_hex() through data export proceduresAffected if Data export operations that trigger output_hex() in data/data-out.c are performed
You are affected if GNU PSPP version 0.11.0 or any version below 1.0.1 is installed and processes data that triggers the output_hex() function in libpspp.
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 GNU PSPP to version 1.0.1 or later to obtain the patch that fixes the illegal address access in the output_hex() function. If upgrading is not immediately possible, restrict or validate input processed by the affected function to prevent exploitation.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $5,568.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-12958 — 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-2017-12958 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