CVE-2017-9906
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 cause a denial of service or possibly have unspecified other impact via a crafted .fpx file, related to "Data from Faulting Address is used as one or more arguments in a subsequent Function Call starting at Xfpx!gffGetFormatInfo+0x0000000000028508."
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 confidenceXnView Classic Version 2.40 contains a memory corruption vulnerability when parsing crafted .fpx files. The vulnerability occurs in the Xfpx!gffGetFormatInfo function where data from a faulting address is used as arguments in a subsequent function call, leading to denial of service or potentially arbitrary 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
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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 Classic installationCheck for XnView installation directory (typically C:\Program Files\XnView or C:\Program Files (x86)\XnView) and locate xnview.exeAffected if xnview.exe exists and version is 2.40
-
Confirm installed version numberRight-click xnView.exe, select Properties, check the Details tab for Product Version, or run 'xnview.exe /?' or check Help > AboutAffected if Product Version shows exactly 2.40
-
Identify vulnerable librarySearch for xfpx.dll or similar FPX processing libraries in the XnView installation directoryAffected if xfpx.dll or fpx handling library exists in the XnView folder and is used to process .fpx files
-
Check .fpx file associationLook in the XnView installation for file association settings or check if .fpx is listed in XnView's supported formatsAffected if XnView has .fpx format enabled in its configuration or file associations
If XnView Classic version 2.40 is installed with .fpx file handling enabled, the environment is affected by this 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 dataUpgrade XnView Classic to a patched version if available, or replace with an alternative image viewer that properly handles .fpx format parsing. Until patched, avoid opening untrusted .fpx files.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 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 $1,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-9906 — 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-2017-9906 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