CVE-2014-7409
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 Liburan Hemat (aka com.liburan.bro) 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 confidenceThe Liburan Hemat Android application version 1.0 fails to validate X.509 certificates from SSL servers during HTTPS connections. This allows man-in-the-middle attackers to intercept traffic by presenting fraudulent certificates, enabling eavesdropping and credential theft.
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= 1CVSS 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 the installed version of the applicationLocate Djogjahotel Liburan Hemat in your Android device's application manager and record the installed version numberAffected if The installed version is 1.0 (or simply version 1)
-
Verify SSL certificate validation is implementedDecompile the application APK and inspect the network code for SSL/TLS implementation. Look for custom TrustManager, TrustManagerImpl, or X509TrustManager implementations and check whether they properly validate the full X.509 certificate chainAffected if The code contains a custom TrustManager that accepts all certificates, skips chain validation, or contains logic that bypasses certificate verification
-
Check for certificate pinning implementationExamine the network security configuration or SSL handling code to determine if certificate pinning is configured. Search for pinning-related methods or configuration filesAffected if Certificate pinning is not implemented and the app relies on default Android trust validation that can be bypassed
-
Perform a certificate validation testUse a man-in-the-middle proxy (such as Burp Suite or OWASP ZAP) with an untrusted or self-signed certificate and attempt to intercept HTTPS traffic from the applicationAffected if The application accepts the fraudulent certificate and establishes an HTTPS connection without warning or error
You are affected if you have Djogjahotel Liburan Hemat version 1 installed AND the application fails to properly validate SSL/TLS certificates, allowing traffic interception by a man-in-the-middle attacker.
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 using certificate pinning or Android's default TrustManager with full X.509 chain verification. Test all network endpoints to confirm validation is enforced.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-7409 — 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-2014-7409 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