CVE-2017-9893
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 · uneditedXnView Classic for Windows Version 2.40 allows remote attackers to execute code via a crafted .fpx file, related to a "User Mode Write AV starting at Xfpx!gffGetFormatInfo+0x0000000000012548."
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 confidenceXnView Classic for Windows Version 2.40 contains a memory corruption vulnerability when parsing crafted .fpx (FlashPix) image files. The vulnerability triggers a User Mode Write Access Violation in the Xfpx.dll library at function gffGetFormatInfo, which can be exploited by remote attackers to achieve code execution.
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= 2.40CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/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 XnView installationLook for XnView executable in common installation paths such as C:\Program Files\XnView\xnview.exe or C:\Program Files (x86)\XnView\xnview.exe, or check Start Menu for XnView Classic entryAffected if XnView executable is not found - the software is not installed
-
Check installed XnView versionRight-click the XnView executable, select Properties, and view the Details tab to see the File Version, or run XnView and go to Help > About to display the version numberAffected if The version displayed is 2.40 exactly - this matches the affected version range
-
Confirm vulnerable Xfpx.dll component existsCheck for Xfpx.dll in the XnView installation directory (typically C:\Program Files\XnView\ or C:\Program Files (x86)\XnView\) - this DLL handles FlashPix (.fpx) image format parsingAffected if Xfpx.dll is present in the XnView installation folder - the vulnerable component is available for exploitation
-
Determine if .fpx file handling is accessibleLaunch XnView and attempt to open a .fpx file, or check File > Open dialog to see if .fpx appears as a supported format, or verify in Options > Configure File Formats that FlashPix is enabledAffected if FlashPix (.fpx) format is supported and enabled in XnView - the attack surface is accessible
You are affected if XnView version 2.40 is installed with the Xfpx.dll component present and .fpx format support enabled, allowing malicious .fpx files to trigger the memory corruption vulnerability.
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 dataUsers should update to a newer version of XnView if available, or discontinue use of the affected version until a vendor patch is released. Avoid opening untrusted .fpx files from unknown sources.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,696.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-9893 — 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-2017-9893 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