CVE-2022-43295
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 · uneditedXPDF v4.04 was discovered to contain a stack overflow via the function FileStream::copy() at xpdf/Stream.cc:795.
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 · moderate confidenceA stack overflow vulnerability exists in XPDF v4.04 within the FileStream::copy() function at xpdf/Stream.cc:795. The function performs an unbounded copy operation without proper bounds checking, allowing a specially crafted PDF file to trigger a stack buffer overflow.
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= 4.04CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify installed XPDF versionRun 'xpdf -v' or 'pdftotext -v' to display the XPDF version number. If using a package manager, query the installed package with 'dpkg -l | grep xpdf' (Debian) or 'rpm -qi xpdf' (RHEL).Affected if The reported version is exactly 4.04, indicating the vulnerable release.
-
Locate the vulnerable Stream.cc source fileSearch for the file xpdf/Stream.cc in the XPDF source tree or installation directory. Use 'find /usr -name Stream.cc 2>/dev/null' or check the source code directory if XPDF was built from source.Affected if The file exists at xpdf/Stream.cc, confirming the component containing the flaw is present in the environment.
-
Verify the FileStream::copy function existsIf source code is available, inspect xpdf/Stream.cc around line 795 to confirm the FileStream::copy function is defined. Use 'grep -n "copy" Stream.cc' to locate the function.Affected if The FileStream::copy function exists at the reported location (line 795), indicating the vulnerable code path is present.
-
Determine exposure to untrusted PDF processingReview any applications or scripts that invoke XPDF tools (xpdf, pdftotext, pdfinfo, pdftoppm) to process PDF files from untrusted or external sources. Check crontabs, web applications, or automated workflows.Affected if XPDF is used to process PDF files from untrusted or unknown sources, enabling a specially crafted PDF to trigger the overflow.
A user is affected if XPDF version 4.04 is installed and the system processes untrusted PDF files through the vulnerable FileStream::copy function in xpdf/Stream.cc.
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 proper length validation in the FileStream::copy() function to ensure the destination buffer size is not exceeded. If available, upgrade to a patched version of XPDF. Consider input validation on Stream data before copying operations.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-43295 — 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-2022-43295 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