CVE-2017-9184
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 "cannot be represented in type int" issue in input-bmp.c:314:7.
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 confidenceThis is an integer type handling vulnerability in AutoTrace's BMP input parser. A value that cannot be represented in type 'int' is being assigned to an int variable at input-bmp.c:314, likely causing an integer overflow. This could lead to memory corruption, out-of-bounds read/write, or potentially remote code execution when processing 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.
-
Verify AutoTrace is installedRun 'autotrace --version' or check for the binary at /usr/bin/autotraceAffected if If AutoTrace is not installed, this CVE does not apply
-
Confirm the installed version is 0.31.1Run 'autotrace --version' and compare the output to '0.31.1'Affected if If the version is exactly 0.31.1, the system is running the affected version
-
Check if BMP input files are being processedReview any automated or user-driven workflows that use autotrace to process BMP image filesAffected if If BMP files are being processed by autotrace, the vulnerable code path in input-bmp.c:314 is reachable
-
Inspect the vulnerable source codeIf source is available, examine input-bmp.c around line 314 for the int variable assignment handling BMP dimension values; look for int type used where larger dimensions could cause overflowAffected if If the code still uses 'int' type for dimension variables at this location, the vulnerability is present in any locally-built version
A user is affected if they run AutoTrace version 0.31.1 and process BMP files with this tool, as the integer overflow in the BMP parser at input-bmp.c:314 would be triggered by specially crafted BMP files with large dimension values.
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 dataReplace the int type with a larger type (size_t, long, or uint32_t) at the affected location in input-bmp.c to properly handle large BMP dimension values, and validate all size calculations before use.
- 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-2017-9184 — 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-2017-9184 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