CVE-2021-27033
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 · uneditedA maliciously crafted PDF file, when opened by a user in Autodesk Design Review, can trigger a Double Free vulnerability in the Autodesk Design Review application. A malicious actor may leverage this vulnerability to cause memory corruption and execute arbitrary code in the context of the current process.
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 confidenceA double-free vulnerability exists in Autodesk Design Review where opening a specially crafted PDF file causes the application to free memory twice. This memory corruption can be exploited to achieve arbitrary code execution within the context of the running process.
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= 2011= 2012= 2013= 2017= 2018CVSS 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
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
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 Autodesk Design Review is installedCheck for the application in the Windows registry under HKLM\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Uninstall or look for the executable at typical installation paths such as C:\Program Files\Autodesk\Design Review\ or C:\Program Files (x86)\Autodesk\Design Review\Affected if The application is found installed on the system
-
Determine the installed versionRight-click on DesignReview.exe and select Properties, then check the Details tab for the Product Version, or query the Windows registry key HKLM\SOFTWARE\Autodesk\Design Review for the Version valueAffected if The version matches 2011, 2012, 2013, 2017, or 2018
-
Confirm PDF file handling capabilityVerify that the installation includes PDF import functionality by checking for PDF-related DLLs in the application directory or by attempting to open a PDF file within the applicationAffected if PDF files can be opened or imported into Autodesk Design Review
-
Check for vulnerable PDF processing componentsInspect the application binaries for version information on PDF handling components, or check the application logs for PDF processing activityAffected if The application processes PDF files using vulnerable components
A user is affected if Autodesk Design Review version 2011, 2012, 2013, 2017, or 2018 is installed and the PDF file handling feature is enabled or available on the system.
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 dataUsers should avoid opening untrusted or unexpected PDF files in Autodesk Design Review until an official vendor patch is available; organizations should inventory software usage and consider application isolation or memory protection tools as compensating controls.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2021-27033 — 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-2021-27033 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