CVE-2017-9910
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 an "Error Code (0xc000041d) starting at wow64!Wow64NotifyDebugger+0x000000000000001d."
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 v2.40 fails to properly validate .fpx (FlashPix) image files, triggering a fatal application exit (status 0xc000041d) in the WOW64 emulation layer when processing a crafted file. This results in denial of service and may allow unspecified other impact.
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.
-
Confirm XnView Classic installationSearch for XnView executable (xnview.exe) in common installation directories such as C:\Program Files\XnView or C:\Program Files (x86)\XnView, or check Start Menu shortcuts and uninstall registry entries.Affected if XnView Classic is found on the system.
-
Verify installed XnView versionRight-click xnview.exe, select Properties, then view the Details tab to read the File Version. Alternatively, run 'xnview.exe /?' or check Help > About within the application.Affected if The version is exactly 2.40.
-
Confirm .fpx file association or historyCheck if .fpx (FlashPix) file extension is associated with XnView by viewing File Associations in XnView settings, or search the system for any .fpx files that may have been opened previously.Affected if XnView is configured to open .fpx files or has processed .fpx files in the past.
-
Identify WOW64 environmentOn 64-bit Windows, verify the presence of WOW64 subsystem by checking if XnView.exe runs as a 32-bit process on a 64-bit Windows system (visible in Task Manager as *32 or via process properties).Affected if XnView Classic 2.40 is running on a 64-bit Windows system using WOW64 emulation.
A user is affected if XnView Classic version 2.40 is installed on a system and is used to open .fpx (FlashPix) image files, particularly on 64-bit Windows via WOW64.
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 dataAvoid opening untrusted .fpx files in XnView Classic. Monitor vendor for patched versions. Consider using alternative image viewers or implementing file-type restrictions at the enterprise level.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing1.0 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 $1,424.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-9910 — 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-2017-9910 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