CVE-2021-33913
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 · uneditedlibspf2 before 1.2.11 has a heap-based buffer overflow that might allow remote attackers to execute arbitrary code (via an unauthenticated e-mail message from anywhere on the Internet) with a crafted SPF DNS record, because of SPF_record_expand_data in spf_expand.c. The amount of overflowed data depends on the relationship between the length of an entire domain name and the length of its leftmost label. The vulnerable code may be part of the supply chain of a site's e-mail infrastructure (e.g., with additional configuration, Exim can use libspf2; the Postfix web site links to unofficial patches for use of libspf2 with Postfix; older versions of spfquery relied on libspf2) but most often is not.
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 writes past the bounds of a buffer, overwriting adjacent memory an attacker can turn to their advantage. Crafted input can overwrite control data and redirect execution. Remediation is validating every index and length before a write, plus modern memory-safety mitigations.
General guidance for the out-of-bounds write 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< 1.2.11CVSS 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:3.1/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 · scoped1.2.11
libspf2 version 1.2.11 or later
- 1. Identify systems running libspf2 and verify the currently installed version (e.g., check package manager or library version)
- 2. Obtain libspf2 version 1.2.11 or later from the official source (e.g., https://github.com/sheffer/libspf2/releases)
- 3. Upgrade libspf2 to version 1.2.11 or newer using the appropriate method for your distribution (package manager or compile from source)
- 4. Rebuild any applications statically linked against libspf2 to ensure they use the fixed library
- 5. Restart any services that use SPF checking (e.g., Exim, Postfix, spfquery) to load the updated library
- 6. Verify the upgrade was successful by checking the installed library version
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-2021-33913 — 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-2021-33913 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