CVE-2014-6975
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 Twin Lin (aka com.twinlin.twmo) application 5 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 Twin Lin Android application version 5 fails to validate X.509 certificates from SSL servers, enabling man-in-the-middle attackers to intercept traffic by presenting fraudulent certificates and capture sensitive data transmitted between the app and backend servers.
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= 5CVSS 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 Twin Lin app versionCheck the installed applications on the Android device and verify the exact version number of the Twin Lin applicationAffected if The installed version is Twin Lin version 5 (specifically Twin Lin Project Twin Lin version 5)
-
Verify SSL certificate validation is implementedInspect the application source code or decompiled APK to examine the SSL/TLS implementation, specifically looking for certificate validation logic using TrustManager or similar validation mechanismsAffected if The code shows missing or disabled X.509 certificate chain validation logic in the network communication layer
-
Check for hostname verificationExamine the application code for proper hostname verification using methods like hostnameVerifier or equivalent SSL socket factory configurationAffected if Hostname verification is not implemented or is unconditionally set to accept all hostnames
-
Test for certificate acceptance with invalid certificatesConfigure a man-in-the-middle proxy with a self-signed or invalid certificate and attempt to intercept traffic between the app and backend serversAffected if The application successfully establishes connections and transmits data when presented with an invalid or untrusted SSL certificate
-
Inspect network traffic for sensitive data exposureUse a network traffic analysis tool to capture and inspect unencrypted or sensitive data being transmitted without proper TLS protectionAffected if Sensitive authentication or user data is visible in plaintext or can be captured via a fraudulent certificate intercept
Your environment is affected if you have Twin Lin Android app version 5 installed and the app accepts invalid SSL certificates or lacks proper X.509 certificate and hostname validation, allowing traffic interception.
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/TLS certificate validation including chain-of-trust verification and hostname verification, preferably with certificate pinning for critical endpoints.
- 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-2014-6975 — 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-2014-6975 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