CVE-2014-5887
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 Yell Local Search (aka com.yell.launcher2) application 4.2.1.4 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 Yell Local Search Android application version 4.2.1.4 fails to validate X.509 certificates from SSL servers during HTTPS connections. This means the app accepts any certificate presented by a server, allowing attackers on the same network to intercept traffic by presenting a malicious certificate. Sensitive data transmitted (such as search queries, location data, or user credentials) can be captured by man-in-the-middle attackers.
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= 4.2.1.4CVSS 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 versionRun 'adb shell pm list packages' to find the package name, then 'adb shell dumpsys package <package_name>' to view versionInfo. The package is typically com.yell.android or similar for Yell Local Search.Affected if The installed version is exactly 4.2.1.4
-
Extract and inspect the APKPull the APK from the device using 'adb pull /data/app/<package_name>/base.apk' and decompile it using a tool like apktool or jadx.Affected if APK extraction is successful and the app binary is available for code analysis
-
Locate SSL/TLS handling codeSearch the decompiled code for HTTPS connection handling - look for HttpsURLConnection, SSLContext, or TrustManager implementations. Check for any custom TrustManager classes.Affected if The app contains code that creates HTTPS connections to transmit data
-
Check for certificate validation weaknessesInspect any TrustManager or hostname verifier implementations. Look for: (a) TrustManager implementations that return true without validating certificates, (b) use of ALLOW_ALL_HOSTNAME_VERIFIER, (c) absence of certificate chain verification logic.Affected if The code contains a TrustManager or hostname verifier that accepts certificates without proper validation (e.g., accepts all certificates, does not verify the certificate chain, or skips hostname verification)
A defender is affected if they have Yell Local Search version 4.2.1.4 installed AND the app transmits data over HTTPS without proper certificate chain and hostname validation in its SSL/TLS implementation.
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 dataThe application code must be updated to properly validate SSL certificates by implementing certificate chain verification and hostname validation. This typically involves using a properly configured TrustManager or CertificatePinner to ensure only trusted, valid certificates are accepted.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $4,480.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-5887 — 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-2014-5887 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