CVE-2014-5528
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 · uneditedThe Appsflyer library for Android does not verify X.509 certificates from SSL servers, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof servers and obtain sensitive information via a crafted certificate.
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 confidenceThe Appsflyer library for Android fails to validate X.509 certificates during SSL/TLS connections, allowing man-in-the-middle attackers to intercept communications by presenting fraudulent certificates and obtain sensitive data such as authentication tokens or user credentials.
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 dataall versionsCVSS 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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:A/AC:M/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
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 if Appsflyer library is present in the Android applicationDecompile the application APK and examine the lib/ or assets/ folders for Appsflyer SDK files, or inspect the build.gradle / pom.xml / dependencies for com.appsflyer:appsflyer-sdk entriesAffected if The Appsflyer library is included in the application dependencies or bundled libraries
-
Determine the installed Appsflyer library versionCheck the application's dependency manifest (build.gradle, pom.xml, or libs/ folder) for the Appsflyer SDK version number, or examine the JAR file name if presentAffected if Any version is found; the advisory states all versions are affected
-
Verify if SSL certificate validation is implemented in the codeDecompile the APK and search for SSL/TLS validation methods (TrustManager, X509TrustManager, or hostname verification). Examine any custom TrustManager implementations for proper certificate chain validation logicAffected if No proper certificate validation is found, or a blank/nop implementation of TrustManager is detected (accepting all certificates)
-
Check for certificate pinning as a compensating controlSearch the decompiled source code for certificate pinning implementations (SSL pinning libraries, pinned certificates in code, or okhttp CertificatePinner configurations)Affected if No certificate pinning implementation is found and the Appsflyer library is present
The environment is affected if the Appsflyer library is included in the Android application without proper certificate chain validation and without certificate pinning as a compensating control.
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 to a patched version of the Appsflyer library that implements proper certificate chain validation and hostname verification, or implement certificate pinning as a compensating control.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-5528 — 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-2014-5528 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