CVE-2017-5853
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 · uneditedInteger overflow in base/PdfParser.cpp in PoDoFo 0.9.4 allows remote attackers to have unspecified impact via a crafted file.
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 · moderate confidenceInteger overflow vulnerability in the PDF parser (base/PdfParser.cpp) of PoDoFo library version 0.9.4. The overflow occurs during parsing of crafted PDF files, likely in size calculations or memory allocation operations, potentially leading to heap-based buffer overflows or memory corruption.
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= 0.9.4CVSS 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.
-
Identify PoDoFo library versionCheck the version of libpodofo installed on the system. On Linux: dpkg -l | grep podofo, rpm -qa | grep podofo, or find the shared library file (libpodofo*) and run strings or check its metadata. In Windows, check the DLL version properties or the application's dependency manifest.Affected if The installed PoDoFo library version is exactly 0.9.4
-
Identify application linking to PoDoFoFor running processes: ldd <application_binary> | grep podofo or on Windows use Process Explorer or Dependencies Walker to see if the application loads libpodofo.dll. Check application build files or documentation for PoDoFo dependency.Affected if An application links to and loads the vulnerable PoDoFo 0.9.4 library
-
Confirm PDF parsing feature is in useReview application logs, configuration, or code to determine if the application parses PDF files using PoDoFo's PdfParser class (base/PdfParser.cpp). This includes any feature that opens, reads, or processes PDF documents.Affected if The application uses PoDoFo to parse PDF files, particularly with the PdfParser component
-
Check for processing untrusted PDFsDetermine whether the application processes PDF files from untrusted or external sources, as the vulnerability is triggered by crafted PDF files.Affected if The application processes PDF files from untrusted or user-supplied sources using the vulnerable PoDoFo library
You are affected if your system has PoDoFo version 0.9.4 installed and any application uses that library to parse PDF files from any source.
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 to a patched version of PoDoFo if available, or implement strict input validation on PDF files before parsing. Consider sandboxing PDF processing or using alternative PDF libraries if PoDoFo is no longer maintained.
- 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-2017-5853 — 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-2017-5853 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