CVE-2017-9165
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 · uneditedlibautotrace.a in AutoTrace 0.31.1 has a heap-based buffer over-read in the GET_COLOR function in color.c:17:11.
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 · moderate confidenceA heap-based buffer over-read vulnerability exists in the GET_COLOR function in color.c of libautotrace.a version 0.31.1. The function reads memory beyond the allocated buffer boundary when processing color data, potentially allowing an attacker to read sensitive heap contents or cause denial of service. This critical vulnerability (CVSS 9.8) requires no authentication and could be exploited via specially crafted input files processed by AutoTrace.
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= 0.31.1CVSS 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
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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.
-
Check installed autotrace versionRun `autotrace --version` or check via package manager (dpkg -l autotrace, rpm -qi autotrace)Affected if Version is 0.31.1
-
Locate libautotrace.a libraryFind the library file with `find / -name 'libautotrace.a' 2>/dev/null` and verify its build date or associated source version matches 0.31.1Affected if Library version matches 0.31.1 and the file exists
-
Identify processes using libautotraceRun `lsof +D /usr/lib 2>/dev/null | grep -i autotrace` or check running processes that invoke autotrace for image processingAffected if Any process is actively using the autotrace library to process color data
-
Verify color processing feature is in useReview application logs or trace execution with `strace -e trace=read -f <command>` to observe if color-related functions in color.c are being invokedAffected if Input files containing color data are being processed by autotrace
You are affected if autotrace version 0.31.1 or libautotrace.a version 0.31.1 is installed AND you process color image files through autotrace, as the heap buffer over-read in GET_COLOR only triggers during color data processing.
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 dataApply bounds checking in the GET_COLOR function to validate array indices before memory access. If a patched version of AutoTrace is available, upgrade to that version. Until fixed, limit processing of untrusted input files through AutoTrace.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $3,808.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-9165 — 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-2017-9165 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