CVE-2014-6669
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 Inside Crochet (aka com.magazinecloner.insidecrochet) application @7F08017A 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 Inside Crochet Android application fails to verify X.509 certificates from SSL servers, allowing man-in-the-middle attackers to intercept encrypted communications by presenting fraudulent certificates. This enables credential theft and session hijacking through a classic SSL stripping attack.
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= \@7f08017aCVSS 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 Inside Crochet app is installedCheck your Android device for the Pocketmags Inside Crochet application. On Android, use settings to view installed apps or run 'adb shell pm list packages' to list all installed packages.Affected if The Pocketmags Inside Crochet application is present on the device
-
Determine the installed versionOpen the app in the Google Play Store or your device's app settings to view the version information. Compare against the affected version identifier '\@7f08017a' if displayed.Affected if The installed version matches or corresponds to the affected version identifier
-
Verify if the app makes network connectionsUse network monitoring tools such as a packet capture or Android network debugger to observe if the app attempts to make HTTPS connections to remote servers.Affected if The app makes HTTPS connections to external servers
-
Test for proper SSL certificate validationConfigure a test environment with a proxy that presents an invalid or self-signed certificate (such as Burp Suite or mitmproxy). Attempt to intercept traffic from the app. If the app accepts the invalid certificate without warning or failure, certificate validation is not properly implemented.Affected if The app accepts invalid or self-signed certificates and establishes connections through the proxy without certificate errors
A user is affected if the Inside Crochet app by Pocketmags is installed and accepts invalid SSL certificates, allowing traffic interception through a man-in-the-middle attack.
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 using a correct TrustManager that verifies the full certificate chain and hostname, or migrate to modern networking libraries that enforce certificate validation by default.
- 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-2014-6669 — 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-2014-6669 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