CVE-2017-2575
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 · uneditedA vulnerability was found while fuzzing libbpg 0.9.7. It is a NULL pointer dereference issue due to missing check of the return value of function malloc in the BPG encoder. This vulnerability appeared while converting a malicious JPEG file to BPG.
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 NULL pointer dereference vulnerability exists in libbpg 0.9.7's BPG encoder. The code fails to check the return value of malloc() before using the allocated memory. When malloc fails and returns NULL, subsequent code dereferences this NULL pointer, causing a crash when converting a malicious JPEG file to BPG format.
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= 0.9.7CVSS 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.
-
Check if libbpg library or tools are installedLook for libbpg files, headers, or command-line tools (bpgdec, bpgenc) on the system. Common locations include /usr/lib/, /usr/local/lib/, or installed via package managers.Affected if libbpg is found on the system at all, since version 0.9.7 is the only version listed as affected and the vulnerability exists in that specific release.
-
Identify the installed libbpg versionRun 'bpgenc --version' if the command-line tool exists, or check the library version via 'dpkg -l libbpg' (Debian), 'rpm -qi libbpg' (RPM), or inspect the shared library file for version strings with 'strings' or 'readelf'.Affected if The version returned is exactly 0.9.7, matching the affected version range.
-
Confirm the BPG encoder component is presentVerify the bpg encoder binary (bpgenc) exists and is functional by running 'which bpgenc' or checking for libbpg encoder-related files in the installation directory.Affected if The BPG encoder binary or library component is available for use.
-
Identify processes or applications using libbpg encoderReview any custom applications, scripts, or services that call the libbpg encoder library functions (bpg_encoder_encode, bpg_encoder_init, etc.) or invoke the bpgenc tool.Affected if Any application or service processes images through the libbpg encoder functionality.
The environment is affected if libbpg version 0.9.7 is installed and any process or tool uses the BPG encoder to convert images, since the NULL pointer dereference occurs during JPEG-to-BPG conversion.
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 dataAdd proper NULL checks after all malloc() calls in the BPG encoder. If malloc returns NULL, gracefully handle the error (e.g., return an error code, free partial resources, and exit) instead of dereferencing the pointer.
- Consultation1.0 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 $1,664.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-2575 — 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-2017-2575 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