CVE-2014-7432
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 CalculatorApp (aka com.intuit.alm.testandroidapp) application 4.0 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 CalculatorApp Android application version 4.0 fails to validate X.509 certificates when establishing SSL/TLS connections. This allows man-in-the-middle attackers to intercept communications by presenting a crafted certificate, enabling them to capture sensitive data transmitted between the app and legitimate 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= 4CVSS 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 CalculatorApp is installedUse Android package manager via ADB: 'adb shell pm list packages | grep calculator' or check device Settings > Apps for 'Rama Palaniappan Calculatorapp'Affected if The app is not installed - not affected. If installed, continue to version check.
-
Check installed versionUse 'adb shell dumpsys package com.calculatorapp.v2' or view app info in Settings > Apps > CalculatorApp to find the version numberAffected if Version equals 4 - potentially affected. Versions other than 4 are not in the affected range.
-
Determine if app makes SSL/TLS connectionsInspect app traffic using a network proxy (like Burp or Charles) or check app manifest for network permission and any hardcoded server endpointsAffected if App does not make network connections - not affected. If it makes HTTP/HTTPS connections, the vulnerability applies.
-
Verify certificate validation is missingDecompile the APK (using apktool) and examine the Smali/Java code for custom TrustManager or hostname verifier implementations. Look for classes that override checkServerTrusted or verify methodsAffected if Code shows no certificate chain validation or hostname verification (TrustManager always returns true or no verification) - vulnerable. Proper validation implemented - not affected.
User is affected only if CalculatorApp version 4 is installed AND the app makes SSL/TLS connections AND the code lacks proper X.509 certificate 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 by using a custom TrustManager that validates the server's certificate chain, hostname, and expiration, or configure the network security config to only trust system CAs for production builds.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-7432 — 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-2014-7432 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