CVE-2014-5991
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 Skin Conditions and Diseases (aka com.appsgeyser.wSkinConditions) application 2.1 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 · high confidenceThe Android application 'Skin Conditions and Diseases' (com.appsgeyser.wSkinConditions) version 2.1 fails to validate X.509 certificates when establishing SSL/TLS connections, allowing an attacker on the same network to intercept traffic by presenting a fraudulent certificate and steal sensitive data transmitted by the app.
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= 2.1CVSS 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 the app is installedOn the Android device, go to Settings > Apps > All Apps and look for 'Skin Conditions and Diseases' or check via ADB: `adb shell pm list packages | grep wSkinConditions`Affected if The package com.appsgeyser.wSkinConditions is present on the device
-
Check the installed versionIn Settings > Apps > All Apps > Skin Conditions and Diseases, view the Version info; or via ADB: `adb shell dumpsys package com.appsgeyser.wSkinConditions | grep versionName`Affected if The version displayed is exactly 2.1
-
Verify the app uses network connectionsCheck app permissions in Settings > Apps > Permissions > Skin Conditions and Diseases for 'Network' or 'Internet' access; or use a network traffic analysis tool to observe if the app makes outbound HTTPS connectionsAffected if The app has network permissions and makes outbound connections to remote servers
-
Confirm SSL validation is bypassedCapture network traffic using a man-in-the-middle proxy (such as Burp Suite or OWASP ZAP) configured with a self-signed certificate while the app is in use on the same networkAffected if The app successfully establishes SSL/TLS connections without rejecting the fraudulent certificate, indicating certificate validation is not occurring
A user is affected if the app 'Skin Conditions and Diseases' version 2.1 with package name com.appsgeyser.wSkinConditions is installed and the app communicates over network connections, as the lack of X.509 certificate validation allows traffic interception by any attacker on the same network.
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/TLS certificate chains, typically by implementing certificate pinning or ensuring the default TrustManager validates the full certificate chain. Users should avoid using the app on untrusted networks until patched.
- 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-2014-5991 — 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-2014-5991 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