CVE-2017-9053
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 · uneditedAn issue, also known as DW201703-005, was discovered in libdwarf 2017-03-21. A heap-based buffer over-read in _dwarf_read_loc_expr_op() is due to a failure to check a pointer for being in bounds (in a few places in this function).
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 heap-based buffer over-read vulnerability exists in libdwarf's _dwarf_read_loc_expr_op() function. The code fails to validate that pointers remain within buffer bounds before dereferencing them, allowing an attacker to read beyond allocated heap memory by crafting malicious DWARF debug information.
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= 2017-03-21CVSS 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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/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 libdwarf is installedRun 'ldconfig -p | grep -i dwarf' or check package manager (dpkg -l | grep dwarf, rpm -qa | grep dwarf) to see if libdwarf libraries are present on the systemAffected if libdwarf libraries are found on the system
-
Determine the installed libdwarf versionCheck the library version by running 'dwarfdump -V' or inspecting the libdwarf SO file with 'objdump -p /path/to/libdwarf.so | grep VERSION' or checking the build date from the library metadataAffected if The version or build date matches 2017-03-21 or is an unpatched version around that date
-
Identify applications using libdwarfSearch for binaries that link against libdwarf using 'ldd /path/to/binary | grep dwarf' or check for tools like dwarfdump, elfutils, or debuggers that process DWARF informationAffected if Applications that parse DWARF debug information (debuggers, disassemblers, static analyzers) are in use
-
Check if untrusted DWARF files are processedReview system logs or application behavior for evidence of processing debug info from untrusted sources, or check if the environment handles external ELF/DWARF filesAffected if The system or its applications process DWARF debug information from external or untrusted sources
A system is affected if it runs an unpatched libdwarf version from 2017-03-21 and processes DWARF debug information, especially from untrusted sources.
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 · scopedUpgrade to a patched version of libdwarf that includes proper pointer bounds validation in _dwarf_read_loc_expr_op(), or implement boundary checks before all pointer dereferences in the affected function.
libdwarf 2017-05-15 or later stable release
- 1. Identify the current libdwarf version in use by running `dwarfdump -V` or checking package metadata
- 2. Download the latest stable libdwarf release from the official GNU or libdwarf source repositories
- 3. Extract the source archive: `tar -xzf libdwarf-<version>.tar.gz`
- 4. Navigate to the source directory: `cd libdwarf-<version>`
- 5. Run the configure script: `./configure`
- 6. Compile the library: `make`
- 7. Install the updated library: `make install`
- 8. Rebuild any applications that link against libdwarf to ensure they use the fixed version
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing5.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,752.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-9053 — 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-2017-9053 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