CVE-2017-14503
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 · uneditedlibarchive 3.3.2 suffers from an out-of-bounds read within lha_read_data_none() in archive_read_support_format_lha.c when extracting a specially crafted lha archive, related to lha_crc16.
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 confidencelibarchive 3.3.2 contains an out-of-bounds read vulnerability in the lha_read_data_none() function when processing LHA archives, caused by insufficient bounds checking in the lha_crc16 routine. A specially crafted LHA archive can cause the parser to read memory beyond allocated buffer boundaries, potentially leading to information disclosure or 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= 3.3.2CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/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.
-
Identify libarchive installationRun 'ldd' on binaries that use archive extraction, or search for libarchive shared library files (e.g., find /usr -name 'libarchive*' 2>/dev/null)Affected if libarchive library or tools are present on the system
-
Determine installed libarchive versionUse 'pkg-config --modversion libarchive' or check the library file name directly (ls -la libarchive.so*), then compare to 3.3.2Affected if The installed version is exactly 3.3.2
-
Check if LHA format support is enabledRun 'archive_lha -h' if available, or compile a small test program that calls archive_read_support_format_lha() to verify LHA support is compiled into the libraryAffected if LHA format support is compiled into libarchive and available for use
-
Verify LHA archive parsing is in useReview application logs or traces to confirm LHA archives are being processed, or inspect any archive extraction workflows that handle .lha or .lzh filesAffected if Any application or tool uses libarchive to extract or parse LHA archives with an affected version
You are affected only if libarchive version 3.3.2 is installed AND LHA archive format support is enabled AND LHA archives are being processed by your systems.
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 dataUpdate libarchive to a patched version. If updating is not immediately feasible, avoid extracting untrusted LHA archives with vulnerable versions of libarchive, or run extraction in isolated sandboxed environments to limit impact.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-14503 — 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-2017-14503 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