CVE-2017-6186
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 · uneditedCode injection vulnerability in Bitdefender Total Security 12.0 (and earlier), Internet Security 12.0 (and earlier), and Antivirus Plus 12.0 (and earlier) allows a local attacker to bypass a self-protection mechanism, inject arbitrary code, and take full control of any Bitdefender process via a "DoubleAgent" attack. One perspective on this issue is that (1) these products do not use the Protected Processes feature, and therefore an attacker can enter an arbitrary Application Verifier Provider DLL under Image File Execution Options in the registry; (2) the self-protection mechanism is intended to block all local processes (regardless of privileges) from modifying Image File Execution Options for these products; and (3) this mechanism can be bypassed by an attacker who temporarily renames Image File Execution Options during the attack.
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 confidenceBitdefender security products versions 12.0 and earlier lack Windows Protected Processes feature, allowing attackers to register arbitrary DLLs via Image File Execution Options (IFEO) registry keys. The self-protection mechanism designed to block IFEO modifications can be circumvented by temporarily renaming the IFEO registry key during the attack, enabling code injection into any Bitdefender process.
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<= 12.0<= 12.0<= 12.0CVSS 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
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/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 installed Bitdefender product and versionOpen Programs and Features (appwiz.cpl) or check registry at HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Uninstall\ for entries starting with 'Bitdefender', or run 'bdagent -v' from Bitdefender installation directory if availableAffected if The installed Bitdefender version is 12.0 or earlier, or the product version cannot be determined but matches the affected product names (Antivirus Plus, Internet Security, Total Security)
-
Verify IFEO registry keys for unauthorized entriesOpen Registry Editor and navigate to HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Image File Execution Options, or run 'reg query "HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Image File Execution Options"'Affected if Any subkey exists under IFEO that points to a suspicious DLL path (especially temp directories, unknown paths, or recently added entries for Bitdefender processes like bdagent.exe, bdservicehost.exe, or vksample.dll)
-
Check for recently modified IFEO keysUse Registry auditing or run 'Get-ItemProperty HKLM:\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Image File Execution Options | Get-Member' in PowerShell to enumerate keys, then check LastWriteTime on each subkeyAffected if IFEO subkeys were created or modified recently, especially those targeting Bitdefender executable processes
-
Verify Bitdefender self-protection statusOpen Bitdefender interface, go to Settings > General, and check if 'Self-Protection' is enabled, or check registry under HKLM\SOFTWARE\Bitdefender\Antivirus\ for 'EnableSelfProtection' value set to 1Affected if Self-protection is disabled or the registry key does not exist, indicating the bypass is possible
You are affected if a Bitdefender product version 12.0 or earlier is installed AND there are unauthorized IFEO entries pointing to arbitrary DLLs, or if self-protection is disabled.
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 dataUpgrade to a Bitdefender version newer than 12.0 that implements Protected Processes or contact Bitdefender for a patch. Additionally, monitor registry modifications to IFEO keys as part of defense-in-depth.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 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 $1,696.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-6186 — 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-2017-6186 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