PbcApplication · Pbc Project

CVE-2018-14736

HIGH · 7.5 CVSS v3.0 Published 2018-07-30
Fix available
A fix is available. Upgrade to after 2017-03-02 or later.
See remediation →
84/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
An issue was discovered in libpbc.a in cloudwu PBC through 2017-03-02. A buffer over-read can occur in pbc_wmessage_string in wmessage.c for PTYPE_ENUM.

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 confidence

A buffer over-read vulnerability exists in the PBC (Protocol Buffers C) library's wmessage.c file, specifically in the pbc_wmessage_string function when handling PTYPE_ENUM. The flaw allows reading beyond buffer boundaries, potentially leading to information disclosure or undefined behavior. This is a classic bounds-checking issue in C code where array/string indices are not properly validated before access.

MitigationUpdate to a patched version of cloudwu PBC (post-2017-03-02) that includes proper bounds checking in the pbc_wmessage_string function for PTYPE_ENUM handling, or apply a localized fix to add validation before buffer access operations.

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
PbcApplication
Affected:<= 2017-03-02

CVSS 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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Locate the PBC library source file
    Find the wmessage.c file in your PBC library installation or source tree. Common locations include /src/wmessage.c or a similar source directory within the PBC project.
    Affected if The file cannot be found or is not present in the expected source structure.
  2. Determine the PBC library version or date
    Check the version metadata or file modification date of the PBC library source. Look for version tags, git commit dates, or build timestamps. Compare against the 2017-03-02 threshold.
    Affected if The installed version is dated 2017-03-02 or earlier, indicating it contains the unpatched code.
  3. Inspect the pbc_wmessage_string function
    Open wmessage.c and locate the pbc_wmessage_string function. Search for the code block handling PTYPE_ENUM case. Examine whether bounds checking or validation occurs before any buffer read operations in that code path.
    Affected if The function contains PTYPE_ENUM handling without proper bounds validation before array/buffer access.
  4. Verify buffer access patterns in the vulnerable function
    In the pbc_wmessage_string function, identify all buffer or array access operations within the PTYPE_ENUM case. Check if there is any validation (such as length checks or boundary tests) preceding these accesses.
    Affected if Buffer reads occur without prior validation that the read position/index is within safe bounds.
  5. Check for PTYPE_ENUM usage in message parsing
    Review how your application or service uses PBC to parse protobuf messages. Determine if messages containing enum fields (PTYPE_ENUM) are processed by the pbc_wmessage_string function.
    Affected if Your application processes protobuf messages with enum types using the affected PBC library version.

You are affected if your PBC library version is dated 2017-03-02 or earlier AND your application processes protobuf messages containing enum fields that trigger the vulnerable pbc_wmessage_string function path.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Upgrade available Upgrade to a release after 2017-03-02
Interim mitigation

Update to a patched version of cloudwu PBC (post-2017-03-02) that includes proper bounds checking in the pbc_wmessage_string function for PTYPE_ENUM handling, or apply a localized fix to add validation before buffer access operations.

Fix this in Pbc Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing4.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
12.0 hours of engineering $2,080
Get the upgrade done

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,328.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-14736 — 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 sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2018-14736 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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