CVE-2017-15787
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 · uneditedXnView Classic for Windows Version 2.43 allows attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service via a crafted .dwg file, related to a "Data Execution Prevention Violation starting at xnview+0x0000000000580063."
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 memory corruption vulnerability exists in XnView Classic for Windows v2.43 when parsing specially crafted .dwg files. The flaw triggers a Data Execution Prevention (DEP) violation at a specific memory offset, indicating the application attempts to execute code from non-executable memory, likely due to a buffer overflow during file parsing that can be leveraged for arbitrary code execution or 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= 2.43CVSS 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
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/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.
-
Confirm XnView Classic is installedCheck if XnView Classic exists on the system by looking for the executable. Common installation paths include C:\Program Files\XnView\xnview.exe or C:\Program Files (x86)\XnView\xnview.exe. You can also check Add/Remove Programs in Windows Control Panel.Affected if XnView Classic for Windows is installed on the system
-
Identify the installed XnView versionRight-click on the xnview.exe file, select Properties, then go to the Details tab to view the File Version. Alternatively, launch XnView and go to Help > About to see the version number.Affected if The installed version is exactly 2.43
-
Verify .dwg file association or supportAttempt to open any .dwg file with XnView, or check File > Open to see if .dwg files are listed as supported. The vulnerability triggers when XnView parses a specially crafted .dwg file.Affected if XnView is able to open or preview .dwg files, meaning the .dwg parsing functionality is active
-
Check for abnormal application behavior when opening .dwg filesIf you have a test .dwg file, attempt to open it in XnView. Observe whether the application crashes, freezes, or generates a Windows error related to Data Execution Prevention (DEP).Affected if Opening a .dwg file causes XnView to crash with a DEP violation or memory access error
A system is affected if XnView Classic version 2.43 is installed and the application is used to open .dwg files, as the vulnerability is triggered during parsing of specially crafted .dwg files.
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 dataAvoid opening untrusted or unknown .dwg files in XnView Classic until a vendor patch is obtained. Organizations should assess exposure, implement application whitelisting or sandboxing as compensating controls, and monitor for attempts to exploit this vulnerability.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-15787 — 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-2017-15787 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