CVE-2014-7135
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 Ayuntamiento de Coana (aka com.wInfoCoa) application 0.2 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 Android application 'Ayuntamento de Coana' (com.wInfoCoa) version 0.2 fails to validate X.509 certificates when establishing SSL/TLS connections to remote servers. This allows an attacker positioned on the same network to intercept and modify traffic by presenting a forged certificate, enabling man-in-the-middle attacks and theft of sensitive data.
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= 0.2CVSS 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 vulnerable app is installedOn Android devices, check installed applications for 'Ayuntamiento de Coana' or search for package name 'com.wInfoCoa' using settings, a mobile device management (MDM) solution, or adb command: 'adb shell pm list packages | grep wInfoCoa'Affected if The package com.wInfoCoa appears in the list of installed applications
-
Verify the installed versionCheck the app version in the Google Play Store listing, in the app's 'About' section within the app itself, or via adb: 'adb shell dumpsys package com.wInfoCoa | grep versionName'Affected if The version is reported as exactly 0.2
-
Confirm the app handles sensitive data over networkReview the app's functionality to determine if it transmits user credentials, personal information, or other sensitive data over SSL/TLS connections to remote serversAffected if The app transmits sensitive data to remote servers and is version 0.2
-
Assess network exposureDetermine if users of the affected app connect to untrusted networks such as public WiFi, corporate networks with BYOD devices, or shared networks where an attacker could position themselves for MITM attacksAffected if The app is used on networks where an attacker could intercept traffic (not exclusively trusted private networks)
A user is affected if the Ayuntamiento de Coana app version 0.2 (com.wInfoCoa) is installed on any device and that device is used to access sensitive data or authenticate over network connections, particularly on untrusted networks.
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 by using a trusted certificate store, implementing certificate pinning, or using a properly configured TrustManager that validates the server's certificate chain.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-7135 — 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-2014-7135 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