CVE-2017-9176
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 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (invalid write and SEGV), related to 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 · moderate confidenceAutoTrace 0.31.1 contains a memory corruption vulnerability in the ReadImage function within input-bmp.c at line 370:25. When processing a specially crafted BMP file, the function performs an invalid memory write, leading to a segmentation fault and denial of service.
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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/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.
-
Check if AutoTrace is installedRun 'autotrace --version' or check for the autotrace binary in the system PATHAffected if AutoTrace is present and returns version 0.31.1 exactly
-
Verify the exact AutoTrace versionCompare the installed version output against the affected version 0.31.1Affected if Installed version is 0.31.1
-
Identify BMP input processing capabilityCheck if the autotrace binary includes input-bmp.c functionality by running 'autotrace --help' or 'autotrace --input-format=bmp'Affected if AutoTrace is compiled with BMP input support and can process BMP files
-
Locate the vulnerable input-bmp.c componentIf source is available, verify the presence of input-bmp.c and check if ReadImage function exists around line 370Affected if The vulnerable input-bmp.c with ReadImage function is present in the installation
A user is affected if AutoTrace version 0.31.1 is installed and is used to process BMP input files, as the memory corruption in ReadImage triggers during BMP file 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 dataRestrict processing of untrusted or unverified BMP files with AutoTrace. If a patched version is available, upgrade; otherwise, apply a bounds-checking fix to the ReadImage function in input-bmp.c to validate buffer limits before write operations.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $5,248.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-9176 — 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-2017-9176 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