CVE-2017-17845
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 · uneditedAn issue was discovered in Enigmail before 1.9.9. Improper Random Secret Generation occurs because Math.Random() is used by pretty Easy privacy (pEp), aka TBE-01-001.
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 confidenceEnigmail before version 1.9.9 uses JavaScript's Math.random() for generating cryptographic secrets. Math.random() is a predictable pseudo-random number generator unsuitable for security-sensitive operations, as attackers can potentially reconstruct the generated secrets by predicting the PRNG output.
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= 8.0= 9.0< 1.9.9CVSS 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
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
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 Enigmail is installedIn Thunderbird, go to Add-ons > Extensions and look for Enigmail in the list. On Debian, run: dpkg -l | grep enigmailAffected if Enigmail is not listed or not installed, then this CVE does not apply
-
Determine installed Enigmail versionIn Thunderbird Add-ons manager, click on Enigmail to view the version number. On Debian, run: dpkg -l | grep enigmail and look at the version columnAffected if Version is less than 1.9.9 (for example 1.9.8, 1.9.7, etc.)
-
Confirm OpenPGP operations are in useCheck if you use Enigmail for encrypting emails, signing messages, or generating OpenPGP keys. Look for Enigmail preferences in Thunderbird under OpenPGP settingsAffected if You actively use Enigmail for cryptographic operations (encrypt/sign/generate keys) and the version is below 1.9.9
-
Check Debian package version on Linux systemsRun: apt-cache policy enigmail on Debian 8 or 9 systemsAffected if The installed version shown is less than 1.9.9-1
You are affected if Enigmail version below 1.9.9 is installed and you use it for OpenPGP cryptographic operations.
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 data1.9.9
Update Enigmail to version 1.9.9 or later, which replaces Math.random() with a cryptographically secure random number generator (CSPRNG) for secret generation.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $4,480.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-17845 — 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-2017-17845 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