CVE-2017-9170
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 overflow in the ReadImage function in input-bmp.c:370:25.
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 overflow vulnerability exists in the ReadImage function within input-bmp.c of libautotrace.a in AutoTrace 0.31.1. The overflow occurs when processing BMP image files, allowing potential remote code execution via specially crafted BMP files.
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 if AutoTrace is installedRun 'autotrace --version' or check for the presence of libautotrace.a in the system (typically in /usr/lib/ or /usr/local/lib/)Affected if AutoTrace version 0.31.1 is installed and the library libautotrace.a exists on the system
-
Verify the exact AutoTrace versionExecute 'autotrace --version' and confirm the output shows exactly 0.31.1Affected if The installed version is precisely 0.31.1 (other versions are not affected by this specific CVE)
-
Confirm BMP input support is presentCheck if input-bmp.c was compiled into the library by examining if BMP processing capability exists; run 'autotrace --help' to list supported input formats or check for the file input-bmp.c in the sourceAffected if BMP format support is compiled into the AutoTrace installation and available for use
-
Identify BMP processing usageReview any logs, automation scripts, or workflows that process BMP image files through AutoTrace; check for commands like 'autotrace input.bmp' or API calls to autotrace_read()Affected if The system processes or has processed BMP files through AutoTrace's ReadImage function
-
Audit for untrusted BMP input sourcesExamine file import paths or user upload directories where BMP files could be passed to AutoTrace for processingAffected if BMP files from untrusted or external sources are processed by AutoTrace
A system is affected only if AutoTrace version 0.31.1 is installed with BMP input support enabled and it processes BMP files from any source, particularly untrusted ones.
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 AutoTrace if available; otherwise, implement strict bounds checking and memory allocation validation in the ReadImage function before processing BMP files.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-9170 — 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-2017-9170 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