CVE-2014-5780
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 Bouncy Bill (aka mominis.Generic_Android.Bouncy_Bill) application 1.9.1 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 Bouncy Bill Android application version 1.9.1 fails to validate X.509 certificates from SSL/TLS servers during HTTPS connections. This allows an attacker positioned on the same network to perform a man-in-the-middle attack, intercepting and modifying traffic by presenting a crafted (self-signed or forged) certificate. The app accepts any certificate without verification, enabling credential theft, session hijacking, or data injection.
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= 1.9.1CVSS 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 Bouncy Bill app is installedRun 'adb shell pm list packages | grep -i bouncy' or 'adb shell pm list packages | grep -i playscape' to find the package name, or manually check in Settings > Apps for an app named 'Playscape Bouncy Bill'Affected if The app 'Playscape Bouncy Bill' or a related package containing 'bouncy' or 'playscape' is found on the device
-
Retrieve the installed versionRun 'adb shell dumpsys package <package_name>' and look for 'versionName' in the output, or view the app version in Settings > Apps > Bouncy Bill > App infoAffected if The version displayed is 1.9.1
-
Confirm vulnerability applicabilitySince this CVE is a code-level flaw in version 1.9.1 where the app accepts any SSL/TLS certificate without verification, the vulnerability is inherent to this version regardless of configurationAffected if The installed version matches exactly 1.9.1
If the Playscape Bouncy Bill Android application version 1.9.1 is installed, the device is affected by this certificate validation vulnerability.
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/TLS certificate validation in the Android application by configuring the network security configuration to only trust system CAs, and consider implementing certificate pinning for critical endpoints to prevent MITM attacks.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,040.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-5780 — 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-2014-5780 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