CVE-2018-18987
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 · uneditedVT-Designer Version 2.1.7.31 is vulnerable by the program populating objects with user supplied input via a file without first checking for validity, allowing attacker supplied input to be written to known memory locations. This may cause the program to crash or allow remote code execution.
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 confidenceVT-Designer Version 2.1.7.31 parses file input without validating contents before populating program objects, allowing attacker-controlled data to be written to known memory locations. This is a classic unsafe deserialization or file parsing vulnerability that enables memory corruption leading to denial of service or remote 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= 2.1.7.31CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/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.
-
Identify if VT-Designer is installedCheck for the presence of Invt Vt Designer or VT-Designer software on the system. Look in Program Files, Program Files (x86), or other application installation directories for a folder named 'VT-Designer' or similar.Affected if The software is found on the system.
-
Determine the installed versionRight-click on the executable file (typically named VTDesigner.exe or similar) in the installation folder, select Properties, and check the Version tab. Alternatively, check the program's About or Help menu within the application.Affected if The version displayed is 2.1.7.31.
-
Identify project or configuration filesLook for file types associated with VT-Designer in user-accessible directories. Common project files may have extensions like .vtg, .vtd, .vtp, or similar. Search the system for recently opened or created project files.Affected if Project files for VT-Designer exist on the system.
-
Check for file parsing activityReview any logs or temporary files that may indicate recent file loading operations. Observe if the application parses external files on startup or when opening projects.Affected if The application loads or parses external project files.
A system is affected if VT-Designer version 2.1.7.31 is installed and the application is used to load or parse project files, which triggers the unsafe deserialization 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 dataImplement strict input validation on all file-loaded data, including schema validation and bounds checking before object population. Consider using safe deserialization libraries and adding memory protection mechanisms like ASLR/DEP where applicable.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,808.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-18987 — 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-2018-18987 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