CVE-2017-14577
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 · uneditedSTDU Viewer 1.6.375 allows attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service via a crafted .xps file, related to a "Read Access Violation on Control Flow starting at Unknown Symbol @ 0x0000000003aa7cef called from Unknown Symbol @ 0x0000000004aa024d."
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 confidenceSTDU Viewer 1.6.375 contains a memory corruption vulnerability when parsing crafted .xps files, resulting in a read access violation on control flow. This indicates improper bounds checking during XPS document parsing, allowing attackers to potentially execute arbitrary code or cause denial of service via malicious files.
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= 1.6.375CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/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.
-
Identify STDU Viewer installationCheck if STDU Viewer is installed by searching for the executable (typically stdview.exe or similar in Program Files folders) or checking Add/Remove Programs for Stdutility Stdu Viewer entryAffected if STDU Viewer version 1.6.375 is found installed on the system
-
Determine installed versionRight-click the STDU Viewer executable, select Properties, and check the File Version field, or launch STDU Viewer and look for the version in Help > AboutAffected if The reported version matches exactly 1.6.375
-
Verify .xps file handling capabilityCheck if .xps file associations are registered to STDU Viewer by viewing the file type associations in STDU Viewer settings or checking the Windows Default Programs list for .xps file handlerAffected if STDU Viewer is configured as the handler for .xps files and receives .xps input
-
Inspect recent .xps file accessReview Windows Event Logs (Application log) or STDU Viewer recent files list for any recently opened .xps documentsAffected if STDU Viewer version 1.6.375 has processed any .xps file, as the vulnerability triggers upon parsing
A system is affected if STDU Viewer version 1.6.375 is installed and configured to handle .xps files, as the memory corruption vulnerability triggers when parsing crafted .xps documents.
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 dataUsers should avoid opening untrusted .xps files and consider upgrading to a patched version of STDU Viewer if available, or use alternative document viewers that receive active security updates.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $2,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-14577 — 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-2017-14577 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