CVE-2019-11926
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 · uneditedInsufficient boundary checks when processing M_SOFx markers from JPEG headers in the GD extension could allow access to out-of-bounds memory via a maliciously constructed invalid JPEG input. This issue affects HHVM versions prior to 3.30.9, all versions between 4.0.0 and 4.8.3, all versions between 4.9.0 and 4.15.2, and versions 4.16.0 to 4.16.3, 4.17.0 to 4.17.2, 4.18.0 to 4.18.1, 4.19.0, 4.20.0 to 4.20.1.
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 analysisThe program reads or writes outside the bounds of an allocated buffer, corrupting adjacent memory. With crafted input an attacker can overwrite control data and, with effort, redirect execution to their own code. Remediation ranges from bounds checking and safe library functions to compiler mitigations, usually alongside a careful audit of the surrounding code.
General guidance for the memory buffer bounds error class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
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<= 3.30.9>= 4.0.0, <= 4.8.3>= 4.9.0, <= 4.15.2>= 4.16.0, <= 4.16.3>= 4.17.0, <= 4.17.2>= 4.18.0, <= 4.18.1>= 4.20.0, <= 4.20.1= 4.19.0CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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.
dbcve · scopedHHVM 4.21.0 or later (or HHVM 3.30.10+ if staying on 3.x branch)
- 1. Identify the current HHVM version in use: `hhvm --version`
- 2. Review the commit at https://github.com/facebook/hhvm/commit/f9680d21beaa9eb39d166e8810e29fbafa51ad15 for the specific code changes made to fix the boundary check vulnerability
- 3. If currently on HHVM 3.x series (≤3.30.9), upgrade to HHVM 3.30.10 or later
- 4. If currently on HHVM 4.x series (≤4.8.3, ≤4.15.2, ≤4.16.3, or within 4.17.x-4.20.x ranges), upgrade to HHVM 4.21.0 or later
- 5. Verify the upgrade by checking: `hhvm --version`
- 6. Test all JPEG processing functionality in applications using the GD extension to ensure proper operation
- 7. Monitor for any regression issues after upgrade
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-11926 — 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-2019-11926 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