CVE-2014-7911
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 · uneditedluni/src/main/java/java/io/ObjectInputStream.java in the java.io.ObjectInputStream implementation in Android before 5.0.0 does not verify that deserialization will result in an object that met the requirements for serialization, which allows attackers to execute arbitrary code via a crafted finalize method for a serialized object in an ArrayMap Parcel within an intent sent to system_service, as demonstrated by the finalize method of android.os.BinderProxy, aka Bug 15874291.
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 confidenceObjectInputStream in Android before 5.0 fails to validate that deserialized objects meet serialization contract requirements, allowing malicious serialized objects with crafted finalize() methods (e.g., android.os.BinderProxy) to execute arbitrary code when deserialized in system_service via Parcelable intents.
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<= 4.4.4= 1.0= 1.1= 1.5= 1.6= 2.0= 2.0.1= 2.1= 2.2= 2.2.1= 2.2.2= 2.2.3CVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:L/AC:L/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
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.
-
Check the Android OS versionGo to Settings > About Phone > Android version, or run 'getprop ro.build.version.release' via ADB shellAffected if The version is 4.4.4 or earlier, or matches any of these: 1.0, 1.1, 1.5, 1.6, 2.0, 2.0.1, 2.1, 2.2, 2.2.1, 2.2.2, 2.2.3
-
Check the SDK versionRun 'getprop ro.build.version.sdk' via ADB shell to get the numeric SDK versionAffected if The SDK version is 19 or lower (SDK 19 corresponds to Android 4.4)
-
Verify system_service behaviorCheck logcat output for unusual system_service crashes or unexpected behavior: 'adb logcat -d | grep -i system_server' or monitor for BinderProxy-related finalize() execution anomaliesAffected if system_service exhibits unexplained crashes or proxy-related errors during intent handling
If the device runs Android 4.4.4 or earlier (SDK 19 or lower), the vulnerable ObjectInputStream code path in system_service is present and the device is affected.
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 dataUpgrade affected Android devices to version 5.0 (Lollipop) or later, which contains the patch for this vulnerability. Avoid deserializing untrusted objects in system services.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation16.0 h
- Testing12.0 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 $11,200.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2014-7911 — 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-2014-7911 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