CVE-2014-7803
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 Woodward Bail (aka com.onesolutionapps.woodwardbailandroid) 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 Woodward Bail Android application version 1.1 fails to validate X.509 certificates when establishing SSL/TLS connections to servers. This allows an attacker positioned on the same network to intercept and modify traffic by presenting a malicious certificate, enabling man-in-the-middle attacks and exposure of sensitive data transmitted by the app.
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 if Woodward Bail app is installedOn the Android device, go to Settings > Apps > find and select 'Woodward Bail' or 'Onesolutionapps Woodward Bail' in the installed applications listAffected if The app Woodward Bail or Onesolutionapps Woodward Bail appears in the installed applications
-
Check the installed version numberIn Settings > Apps > Woodward Bail, view the 'Version' or 'Version info' field under app informationAffected if The version displayed is exactly 1.1
-
Confirm the app uses network connectionsOn Android, go to Settings > Apps > Woodward Bail > Data usage, or use a network analyzer to observe if the app makes outbound SSL/TLS connectionsAffected if The app transmits data over network connections
-
Verify certificate validation is absentIf you have access to the app's APK file, extract and analyze the smali or dex code for TrustManager implementation, or use a security tool to test if the app accepts self-signed certificates when a MITM proxy is presentAffected if The app accepts connections to the same server when a self-signed or attacker-controlled certificate is presented (certificate validation is missing or broken)
A user is affected if the Woodward Bail Android app version 1.1 is installed and the app transmits data over SSL/TLS connections without proper 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 using Android's built-in certificate pinning or standard TrustManager validation to verify server certificates before establishing connections.
- 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-2014-7803 — 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-2014-7803 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