CVE-2014-5671
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 Super Stickman Golf (aka com.noodlecake.ssg) application 2.2 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 · high confidenceThe Super Stickman Golf Android application 2.2 fails to validate X.509 certificate chains from SSL servers, allowing man-in-the-middle attackers to intercept encrypted communications by presenting arbitrary crafted certificates. This is a classic SSL certificate validation bypass vulnerability where the app does not verify the server's certificate against trusted Certificate Authorities.
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= 2.2CVSS 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 installed app versionOn the Android device, go to Settings > Apps > Super Stickman Golf, or use ADB command: `adb shell dumpsys package com.noodlecake.ssg | grep versionName`Affected if The versionName is exactly 2.2 (versionCode may vary but version 2.2 is the vulnerable release)
-
Verify app makes network requestsUse a network traffic analysis tool (such as a proxy like Burp Suite or Charles) to capture the app's outbound connections. Start the app and attempt to trigger network activity (e.g., start a game, check for updates).Affected if The app makes HTTPS requests to external servers without rejecting invalid certificates (traffic is intercepted successfully with a self-signed certificate)
-
Inspect SSL certificate validation codeDecompile the APK using tools like apktool or jadx. Navigate to the source code and examine the implementation of TrustManager, X509TrustManager, or any custom hostname verifier. Look for code that accepts all certificates or skips chain validation.Affected if The code contains implementations that bypass certificate validation, such as empty implementations of checkServerTrusted, accepting all hostnames, or creating an unvalidated TrustManager that trusts all certificates
You are affected if Super Stickman Golf version 2.2 is installed and the app transmits data over HTTPS without properly validating the server's certificate chain, allowing interception with a crafted certificate.
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 SSL certificate validation in the Android app by either configuring the TrustManager to properly validate certificate chains or implementing certificate pinning for known server certificates.
- 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-2014-5671 — 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-2014-5671 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