CVE-2014-7092
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 Ubooly (aka com.ubooly.ubooly) application 4.3.0 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 confidenceThe Ubooly Android application version 4.3.0 fails to properly validate X.509 certificates from SSL servers. This allows an attacker positioned on the same network to perform a man-in-the-middle attack, intercepting and potentially modifying encrypted communications 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= 4.3.0CVSS 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 Ubooly app versionOpen Android device Settings, go to Apps > Ubooly, and check the Version or Version Name field under App Info. Alternatively, query via ADB: adb shell dumpsys package com.ubooly.android | grep versionNameAffected if The version displayed is exactly 4.3.0
-
Confirm app network connectivityStart the Ubooly app and monitor network connections using Android tools like netstat, tcpdump, or a network sniffing proxy. Verify the app is attempting to connect to remote backend servers over HTTPS.Affected if The app establishes SSL/TLS connections to remote servers while running
-
Test SSL certificate validation behaviorConfigure an intercepting proxy (such as Burp Suite or OWASP ZAP) on the network, install a self-signed CA certificate on the Android device, and attempt to intercept traffic from the Ubooly app to its backend.Affected if The app accepts connections to the proxy without certificate validation errors, indicating improper X.509 chain validation
-
Inspect app SSL implementationUse APK decompilation tools (such as jadx or APKTool) to extract and review the Ubooly APK. Examine the source code for TrustManager implementations, hostname verification calls (HostnameVerifier), and SSLContext initialization to identify disabled or weak validation.Affected if The code shows TrustManager is custom-implemented with validation disabled, or hostname verification is set to accept all hosts
You are affected if the installed Ubooly Android app version is exactly 4.3.0 and it makes SSL connections to backend servers without proper certificate chain and hostname validation.
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 in the Android application, including chain-of-trust verification and hostname validation. Consider implementing certificate pinning for sensitive 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-2014-7092 — 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-2014-7092 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