CVE-2014-6843
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 Sweatshop (aka com.orderingapps.sweatshop) application 2.96 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 Sweatshop Android application version 2.96 fails to validate X.509 certificates from SSL servers, allowing man-in-the-middle attackers to intercept sensitive data by presenting fraudulent certificates. This is a classic SSL certificate validation bypass vulnerability in the Android application's network layer.
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= 2.96CVSS 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.
-
Confirm Sweatshop app is installedOn the Android device, go to Settings > Apps > All, or use 'adb shell pm list packages | grep sweatshop' to check if the Sweatshop app is present on the deviceAffected if The Sweatshop app is installed on the device
-
Check installed app versionIn Settings > Apps > Sweatshop > Version info, or use 'adb shell dumpsys package orderingapps.sweatshop' to retrieve the versionName and versionCodeAffected if The version displayed is exactly 2.96 (versionCode may vary)
-
Verify app has network permissionsDecompile the APK and inspect AndroidManifest.xml for the android.permission.INTERNET permission, or use 'adb shell dumpsys package orderingapps.sweatshop' to check requested permissionsAffected if The INTERNET permission is granted (required for the SSL vulnerability to be exploitable)
-
Inspect SSL certificate validation codeDecompile the APK (using apktool or similar), then locate network-related source files and search for TrustManager, X509TrustManager, or hostname verifier implementations. Look for patterns like empty trustAllHosts verifiers or custom TrustManager that accepts all certificatesAffected if Code contains a custom TrustManager or hostname verifier that bypasses certificate chain validation (accepts all certificates without verification)
Your environment is affected if the Sweatshop app version 2.96 is installed and the app contains code that disables or bypasses SSL/TLS certificate validation, which would allow a man-in-the-middle attack to intercept sensitive data.
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 X.509 certificate chain validation using a custom TrustManager that validates against trusted Certificate Authorities, or implement certificate pinning for known server certificates.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation3.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,952.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-6843 — 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-2014-6843 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