CVE-2024-4976
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 · uneditedOut-of-bounds array write in Xpdf 4.05 and earlier, due to missing object type check in AcroForm field reference.
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 confidenceOut-of-bounds array write vulnerability in Xpdf versions 4.05 and earlier. The flaw exists in AcroForm field reference handling due to a missing object type check, which can cause memory corruption when processing specially crafted PDF files.
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<= 4.05CVSS 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
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/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.
-
Verify Xpdf is installedCheck for the xpdf binary on the system using 'which xpdf' on Linux/macOS or by searching for xpdf in Program Files on Windows. Alternatively, run 'xpdf -v' or 'xpdf -help' to invoke the program.Affected if Xpdf is found on the system
-
Determine installed Xpdf versionRun 'xpdf -v' or 'xpdf -help' and locate the version number in the output. On Linux, also check package manager output via 'dpkg -l | grep xpdf' or 'rpm -qa | grep xpdf'.Affected if The version displayed is 4.05 or any version lower than 4.05
-
Confirm AcroForm handling is part of standard Xpdf functionalityUnderstand that AcroForm field processing is a core feature of Xpdf used when rendering PDF forms. No additional module or configuration toggle needs to be enabled; the vulnerability triggers when Xpdf opens a PDF containing malicious AcroForm references.Affected if Xpdf is able to open and render PDF files, which means AcroForm handling is active by default
If Xpdf version 4.05 or earlier is installed, the environment is affected by this vulnerability when processing PDF files.
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 dataUpdate Xpdf to a version newer than 4.05 when a patch becomes available. Until then, avoid opening untrusted or unknown PDF files with vulnerable Xpdf installations.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $4,864.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-4976 — 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-2024-4976 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