dbcve.org
KonigsleitenApplication · Koenigsleiten77

CVE-2014-6943

MEDIUM · 5.4 CVSS v2.0 Published 2014-10-15
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
59/100
Remediation priority · Elevated
No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
The Konigsleiten (aka com.knigsleiten) application 1.0 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 confidence

The Konigsleiten Android application version 1.0 fails to verify X.509 certificates from SSL servers, allowing man-in-the-middle attackers to intercept communications by presenting a crafted certificate. This enables attackers to spoof legitimate servers and capture sensitive data transmitted by the app.

MitigationImplement proper SSL certificate verification in the Android app, including validating the certificate chain, verifying hostname matching, and considering certificate pinning for critical endpoints.

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
KonigsleitenApplication
Affected:= 1

CVSS 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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Confirm Konigsleiten app installation and version
    On the Android device, go to Settings > Apps > Konigsleiten (or Koenigsleiten77), and verify the installed version number is 1.0. Alternatively, use ADB command: `adb shell pm list packages` to find the package, then `adb shell dumpsys package [package_name]` to see version info.
    Affected if The app version is 1.0 and the package name contains 'konigsleiten' or 'koenigsleiten'.
  2. Verify the app uses network connections
    Monitor network traffic from the device while using the app, or check the app's AndroidManifest.xml for INTERNET permission. Use command: `aapt dump badging [apk_file] | grep uses-permission` to check for INTERNET permission.
    Affected if The app has INTERNET permission and makes outbound network requests to SSL endpoints.
  3. Analyze SSL certificate verification in app code
    Decompile the APK using tools like apktool or jadx. Search the decompiled Java/Smali code for HttpClient, HttpsURLConnection, or TrustManager implementations. Look for custom TrustManager or HostnameVerifier that bypasses verification (e.g., accepts all certificates). Check for code patterns like `ALLOW_ALL_HOSTNAME_VERIFIER` or empty TrustManager implementations.
    Affected if The code contains a custom TrustManager or HostnameVerifier that accepts all certificates, or disables certificate chain validation.
  4. Inspect network traffic for certificate validation failures
    Configure a proxy with a self-signed certificate (e.g., using Burp Suite or mitmproxy) and attempt to intercept traffic from the app. If the app connects successfully without certificate warnings or failures, certificate validation is not properly enforced.
    Affected if The app successfully establishes SSL connections through an untrusted/malicious proxy without any certificate validation errors.

You are affected if the Konigsleiten Android app version 1.0 is installed and the app accepts SSL connections without properly validating the server's X.509 certificate chain.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Implement proper SSL certificate verification in the Android app, including validating the certificate chain, verifying hostname matching, and considering certificate pinning for critical endpoints.

Fix this in Konigsleiten Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
14.0 hours of engineering $2,490
Get help mitigating

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 locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-6943 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2014-6943 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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