CVE-2015-0874
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 · uneditedSmartphone Passbook 1.0.0 does not verify X.509 certificates from SSL servers, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to obtain sensitive information from encrypted communications 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 confidenceSmartphone Passbook 1.0.0 fails to validate X.509 certificates from SSL servers, allowing attackers to intercept encrypted communications via man-in-the-middle attacks. The application accepts any certificate presented by the server, effectively bypassing SSL/TLS protection and exposing sensitive data in transit.
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= 1.0.0CVSS 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
- Network
- Complexity
- High
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
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 Okb Smart Passbook versionCheck the application version in the device's app settings, app store listing, or app metadata. On Android, check Settings > Apps > Okb Smart Passbook > Version. On iOS, check the App Store or the app's info section.Affected if The installed version is exactly 1.0.0 (no other versions are listed as affected)
-
Verify SSL interception capabilityConfigure a network proxy (such as Burp Suite, OWASP ZAP, or Charles Proxy) on the same network as the device. Attempt to intercept HTTPS traffic from the Okb Smart Passbook application.Affected if The application successfully connects through the proxy without any certificate errors or warnings, demonstrating that it accepts the proxy's certificate without validation.
-
Check for certificate validation in app trafficUse a network traffic capture tool (like Wireshark or a mobile packet capture app) to observe the TLS handshake. Examine whether the app validates the server certificate chain, hostname, and expiration.Affected if The app establishes SSL connections regardless of certificate validity (expired, self-signed, or invalid hostname accepted without error).
If Okb Smart Passbook version 1.0.0 is installed and successfully completes SSL connections through an interception proxy or with invalid certificates, the environment is affected by this vulnerability.
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 X.509 certificate chain validation and consider certificate pinning to ensure the app only trusts the intended server certificates.
- Consultation3.0 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 $5,088.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2015-0874 — 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-2015-0874 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