CERTA-2009-AVI-090
Vulnerability from certfr_avis - Published: 2009-03-10 - Updated: 2009-03-10
Plusieurs vulnérabilités présentes dans Foxit Reader permettent à un utilisateur malveillant de contourner la politique de sécurité ou d'exécuter du code arbitraire à distance.
Description
Deux vulnérabilités de type débordement de mémoire permettent à une personne malintentionnée d'exécuter du code arbitraire à distance au moyen d'un fichier au format PDF spécialement construit. L'une des deux vulnérabilités a fait l'objet de l'alerte CERTA-2009-ALE-001.
Une troisième vulnérabilité permet de contourner la politique de sécurité afin d'exécuter une action définie dans le fichier au format PDF sans confirmation de l'utilisateur.
Solution
Se référer au bulletins de sécurité de l'éditeur pour l'obtention des correctifs (cf. section Documentation).
None| Vendor | Product | Description | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Foxit | PDF Reader | Foxit Reader 3.x. | ||
| Foxit | PDF Reader | Foxit Reader 2.x ; |
| Title | Publication Time | Tags | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||||||
{
"$ref": "https://www.cert.ssi.gouv.fr/openapi.json",
"affected_systems": [
{
"description": "Foxit Reader 3.x.",
"product": {
"name": "PDF Reader",
"vendor": {
"name": "Foxit",
"scada": false
}
}
},
{
"description": "Foxit Reader 2.x ;",
"product": {
"name": "PDF Reader",
"vendor": {
"name": "Foxit",
"scada": false
}
}
}
],
"affected_systems_content": null,
"content": "## Description\n\nDeux vuln\u00e9rabilit\u00e9s de type d\u00e9bordement de m\u00e9moire permettent \u00e0 une\npersonne malintentionn\u00e9e d\u0027ex\u00e9cuter du code arbitraire \u00e0 distance au\nmoyen d\u0027un fichier au format PDF sp\u00e9cialement construit. L\u0027une des deux\nvuln\u00e9rabilit\u00e9s a fait l\u0027objet de l\u0027alerte CERTA-2009-ALE-001.\n\nUne troisi\u00e8me vuln\u00e9rabilit\u00e9 permet de contourner la politique de\ns\u00e9curit\u00e9 afin d\u0027ex\u00e9cuter une action d\u00e9finie dans le fichier au format\nPDF sans confirmation de l\u0027utilisateur.\n\n## Solution\n\nSe r\u00e9f\u00e9rer au bulletins de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 de l\u0027\u00e9diteur pour l\u0027obtention des\ncorrectifs (cf. section Documentation).\n",
"cves": [
{
"name": "CVE-2009-0191",
"url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2009-0191"
},
{
"name": "CVE-2009-0837",
"url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2009-0837"
},
{
"name": "CVE-2009-0836",
"url": "https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2009-0836"
}
],
"initial_release_date": "2009-03-10T00:00:00",
"last_revision_date": "2009-03-10T00:00:00",
"links": [
{
"title": "Bulletins de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 Foxit Reader :",
"url": "http://www.foxitsoftware.com/pdf/reader/security.html"
}
],
"reference": "CERTA-2009-AVI-090",
"revisions": [
{
"description": "version initiale.",
"revision_date": "2009-03-10T00:00:00.000000"
}
],
"risks": [
{
"description": "Ex\u00e9cution de code arbitraire \u00e0 distance"
},
{
"description": "Contournement de la politique de s\u00e9curit\u00e9"
}
],
"summary": "Plusieurs vuln\u00e9rabilit\u00e9s pr\u00e9sentes dans Foxit Reader permettent \u00e0 un\nutilisateur malveillant de contourner la politique de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 ou\nd\u0027ex\u00e9cuter du code arbitraire \u00e0 distance.\n",
"title": "Vuln\u00e9rabilit\u00e9s dans Foxit Reader",
"vendor_advisories": [
{
"published_at": null,
"title": "Bulletins de s\u00e9curit\u00e9 Foxit Software",
"url": null
}
]
}
Drag nodes to arrange them. Double-click a related vulnerability to open it, or a source to visit its link. The Physics button on the left tunes the layout and the simulation; the legend at the bottom left hides or shows nodes by kind and by sighting type.
Sightings
| Author | Source | Type | Date | Other |
|---|
Nomenclature
- Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or observed by the user.
- Confirmed: The vulnerability has been validated from an analyst's perspective.
- Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
- Exploited: The vulnerability was observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Patched: The vulnerability was observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not exploited: The vulnerability was not observed as exploited by the user who reported the sighting.
- Not confirmed: The user expressed doubt about the validity of the vulnerability.
- Not patched: The vulnerability was not observed as successfully patched by the user who reported the sighting.
Vulnerability timeline
Sightings and recorded dates, grouped by day · UTC
How durations are calculated
Following the VTEM framework (Black Hat USA 2015), time to patch starts when the vendor or a coordinator was informed, total time to patch at discovery, and disclosure to patch at public disclosure; vendor response time runs from the report to its acknowledgement. Time to exploit and time unpatched start at the earliest discovery or report, falling back to public disclosure. Unpatched time ends at the first recorded patch, or the calculation time when no patch is recorded. Exploitation to patch shows the interval between those two events; a published proof of concept is a public exploit, not exploitation.
Each result shows its source dates. A negative interval means the end event came first; when date-only inputs leave the order open, the result says so. Date-only inputs are approximate. The earliest evidence wins: KEV report dates and sightings are labelled as such. Records describing another vulnerability are listed but never calculated from, and a PoC alone does not establish exploitation. Missing patch evidence does not prove that no patch exists. Filters below change the event list only.
Loading timeline…
The approach is described in our paper Mapping CVEs to MITRE ATT&CK Techniques: A Curated Gold-Set Classifier and the Limits of LLM-Assisted Label Expansion.
Browse all ATT&CK techniques and the vulnerabilities related to each.
Related by attack behaviour
Vulnerabilities whose description is nearest to this one in the vector space of the CIRCL/vulnerability-attack-technique-biencoder model. This is a similarity search over the bi-encoder space (plain cosine), not a classification, and it has no measured accuracy.