CVE-2017-8291
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 · uneditedArtifex Ghostscript through 2017-04-26 allows -dSAFER bypass and remote command execution via .rsdparams type confusion with a "/OutputFile (%pipe%" substring in a crafted .eps document that is an input to the gs program, as exploited in the wild in April 2017.
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 confidenceGhostscript before 9.22 contains a type confusion vulnerability in .rsdparams handling that bypasses the -dSAFER sandbox, allowing remote command execution via a crafted EPS file containing '/OutputFile (%pipe%' to spawn shell commands.
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= 6.0= 7.0= 7.3= 7.4= 7.5= 7.6= 7.7= 6.0= 7.0= 7.3= 7.4= 7.6= 7.7= 7.3= 7.6= 7.7= 6.0= 7.0< 9.21CVSS 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:3.1/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 Ghostscript versionRun 'gs --version' or 'rpm -q ghostscript' (RHEL) or 'dpkg -l ghostscript' (Debian) to determine the installed Ghostscript versionAffected if The installed version is less than 9.21 (or if you cannot confirm the version is 9.22 or later)
-
Verify EPS/PostScript processing capabilityCheck if Ghostscript is installed by running 'gs --help' or checking for the gs binary in /usr/bin/ or /usr/local/bin/Affected if Ghostscript is installed and can process PostScript or EPS files
-
Identify applications using GhostscriptSearch for applications or services that process EPS files, review any document conversion tools, print subsystems, or image processing workflows that invoke GhostscriptAffected if Any application or service on the system uses Ghostscript to process EPS or PostScript files
-
Review script or code that invokes GhostscriptSearch for scripts, web applications, or automated jobs that call gs or ghostscript, and check if they use the -dSAFER flagAffected if Found scripts that process untrusted EPS/PostScript content without proper restrictions
-
Check for presence of crafted EPS test filesIf you have received suspicious EPS files, examine them for the pattern '/OutputFile (%pipe%' which is the exploit indicatorAffected if Such files exist and have been processed or are pending processing
You are affected if Ghostscript version 9.21 or earlier is installed and your system processes EPS or PostScript files, especially with the -dSAFER protection that can be bypassed by this vulnerability.
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.
dbcve · scoped9.21
Upgrade Ghostscript to version 9.22 or later to patch the vulnerability; alternatively, disable or restrict EPS/PostScript processing in untrusted environments until patching is possible.
Ghostscript 9.21 or later (for Debian 8.0: upgrade to the Jessie LTS security updates or backports containing Ghostscript 9.21+)
- 1. Identify the current Ghostscript version installed by running: gs --version
- 2. For Debian 8.0: Update the package cache and upgrade Ghostscript: apt-get update && apt-get install ghostscript
- 3. For RHEL/CentOS/Enterprise Linux: Run yum update ghostscript or dnf update ghostscript
- 4. For systems with independent Ghostscript installations: Download and install Ghostscript 9.21 or later from https://www.ghostscript.com/download/
- 5. Verify the fix by running: gs --version and confirming the version is 9.21 or higher
- 6. Test that Ghostscript processes .eps files correctly with the updated version
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing1.0 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 $1,744.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-8291 — 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-2017-8291 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