CVE-2017-6845
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 · uneditedThe PoDoFo::PdfColor::operator function in PdfColor.cpp in PoDoFo 0.9.4 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (NULL pointer dereference) 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 · high confidenceA NULL pointer dereference vulnerability exists in PoDoFo::PdfColor::operator function in PdfColor.cpp of PoDoFo 0.9.4. When processing a crafted PDF file, the code fails to properly validate a pointer before dereferencing it, leading to a crash and 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= 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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/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.
-
Identify if PoDoFo library is installedSearch for PoDoFo library files on the system. On Linux: use 'find /usr -name "*podofo*"' or check /usr/lib for libpodofo files. On Windows: search for podofo.dll or podofodll.dll in application directories.Affected if PoDoFo library files are present on the system
-
Determine the installed PoDoFo versionCheck the library version by examining the file version if present, or run 'pkg-config --modversion podofo' if pkg-config is available. Also check any version strings in the library binary using 'strings' or a hex editor.Affected if The version is exactly 0.9.4
-
Identify applications using PoDoFoReview application dependencies to find software that links against PoDoFo. On Linux: use 'ldd' on suspected binaries or check /usr/lib/pkgconfig/*.pc files for podofo dependencies.Affected if Any application on the system depends on PoDoFo 0.9.4
-
Verify PDF processing capability existsConfirm that any identified PoDoFo-dependent application has the ability to process PDF files, as the vulnerability triggers during PDF processing operations.Affected if The application processes PDF files using the vulnerable PoDoFo library
A system is affected if PoDoFo version 0.9.4 is installed and any application on the system uses it to process PDF 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 dataUpdate to a patched version of PoDoFo that includes proper NULL pointer validation before dereferencing in the PdfColor class. If no update is available, implement input validation to reject malformed PDF files before processing.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 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 $4,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-6845 — 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-2017-6845 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