CVE-2017-9729
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 · uneditedIn uClibc 0.9.33.2, there is stack exhaustion (uncontrolled recursion) in the check_dst_limits_calc_pos_1 function in misc/regex/regexec.c when processing a crafted regular expression.
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 stack exhaustion vulnerability exists in uClibc 0.9.33.2's regex engine where the check_dst_limits_calc_pos_1 function in misc/regex/regexec.c suffers from uncontrolled recursion when processing specially crafted regular expressions. An attacker can trigger this to cause stack overflow 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= 0.9.33.2CVSS 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.
-
Identify if the environment uses uClibcCheck for the presence of uClibc library files (libc.so, libuclibc.so) or examine build/configuration files that reference uClibc as the C library. On embedded systems, inspect the filesystem for uClibc shared objects.Affected if The system or application is linked against uClibc as its C library implementation.
-
Determine the installed uClibc versionRun 'ldd --version' if available, or check the library file metadata. On embedded systems, examine the uClibc library file itself or the build configuration that specifies the uClibc version.Affected if The installed version is exactly 0.9.33.2.
-
Verify if the regex engine is in useSearch application code for inclusion of regex.h header and calls to regcomp(), regexec(), or regfree() functions. Inspect binary dependencies to confirm the regex component from uClibc is linked.Affected if Applications or binaries are using the regex functionality from the uClibc library.
-
Determine if regex input is externally influencedReview application code paths that feed data into regcomp() calls. Identify whether untrusted or user-controlled strings are passed as the regex pattern argument.Affected if The regex pattern argument to regcomp() can be influenced by external input without sufficient validation.
The environment is affected if it uses uClibc version 0.9.33.2, links against its regex functionality, and processes external input through the regex engine.
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 dataUpgrade to a patched version of uClibc if available; otherwise, implement regex input validation or complexity limits in applications using the affected regex functionality to prevent execution of deeply recursive patterns.
- Consultation3.0 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 $5,568.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-9729 — 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-2017-9729 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