CVE-2014-7648
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 SMARTalk (aka jp.co.fusioncom.smartalk.android) application 1.1 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 SMARTalk Android application version 1.1 fails to validate X.509 certificates from SSL servers during TLS/SSL connections. This certificate validation bypass allows man-in-the-middle attackers to present fraudulent certificates and intercept, modify, or steal 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= 1.1CVSS 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.
-
Verify SMARTalk app is installedOn the Android device, go to Settings > Apps > Applications Manager and look for SMARTalk or SMARTalk Ip Phone Smart, or use command 'adb shell pm list packages' to list installed packagesAffected if SMARTalk application is present on the device
-
Check installed version numberIn Settings > Apps > SMARTalk, view the Version information; alternatively, use 'adb shell dumpsys package <package_name>' to retrieve version detailsAffected if Version is exactly 1.1
-
Confirm the app uses network connectionsObserve that SMARTalk makes outgoing network connections for its VoIP/telephony functionality; this can be verified via network traffic monitoring or checking app permissions for network accessAffected if The app has permission to make network/Internet connections (default behavior for SMARTalk)
-
Verify SSL/TLS is used by the appCapture network traffic using a proxy (like Burp or Charles) or use 'adb shell tcpdump' to observe if the app establishes HTTPS or TLS connections to its serversAffected if App communicates over HTTPS or TLS without proper certificate validation (inherent to version 1.1)
The user is affected if SMARTalk version 1.1 is installed and the app transmits data over network connections, as the certificate validation flaw is baked into this specific version and cannot be disabled.
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 dataThe application must be updated to implement proper SSL certificate validation, including hostname verification and certificate chain validation, preferably using Android's built-in certificate pinning mechanisms or trusted CA store validation.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing8.0 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 $8,448.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-7648 — 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-2014-7648 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