CVE-2017-8787
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::PdfXRefStreamParserObject::ReadXRefStreamEntry function in base/PdfXRefStreamParserObject.cpp:224 in PoDoFo 0.9.5 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (heap-based buffer over-read) or possibly have unspecified other impact via a crafted PDF 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 confidenceHeap-based buffer over-read vulnerability in PoDoFo 0.9.5's PDF xref stream parser (PdfXRefStreamParserObject::ReadXRefStreamEntry at line 224) when parsing crafted PDF files. The lack of proper bounds checking when reading xref stream entries allows reading beyond allocated heap memory.
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= 0.9.5CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/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 installed PoDoFo versionCheck the PoDoFo library version installed in your environment. On Linux systems, this can often be done via package manager (dpkg -l libpodofo, rpm -qi podofo) or by checking the shared library version (ldconfig -p | grep podofo). If building from source, check the version.h or configure.ac file used during compilation.Affected if The installed version is exactly 0.9.5 (Podofo Project Podofo version 0.9.5)
-
Confirm PDF processing capability is in useIdentify processes or applications that use the PoDoFo library for PDF parsing. Check for running services or applications that handle PDF files and link against libpodofo. Review application dependencies and runtime linking.Affected if PoDoFo 0.9.5 is actively loaded and used for PDF parsing in any application or service
-
Locate PDF xref stream parsing code pathIf you have access to the source code or binary, verify the presence of PdfXRefStreamParserObject class and its ReadXRefStreamEntry method (around line 224 in the vulnerable version). This is the specific component with the bounds checking flaw.Affected if Code or binaries containing PdfXRefStreamParserObject::ReadXRefStreamEntry from PoDoFo 0.9.5 are present in the processing environment
Your environment is affected if PoDoFo version 0.9.5 is installed and actively used to parse PDF files, as the vulnerability is triggered during xref stream entry parsing without additional bounds validation.
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 PoDoFo to a patched version if available. If upgrade is not feasible, implement input validation on PDF files before processing and/or run PDF parsing in a sandboxed environment to limit impact of exploitation.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $3,072.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-8787 — 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-2017-8787 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