CVE-2015-4034
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 createFromParcel method in the com.absolute.android.persistence.MethodSpec class in Samsung Galaxy S5s allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary files via a crafted Parcelable object in a serialized MethodSpec object.
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 confidenceThis is a deserialization vulnerability in Samsung Galaxy S5's Android system. The createFromParcel method in the com.absolute.android.persistence.MethodSpec class improperly handles Parcelable objects during deserialization, allowing remote attackers to inject and execute arbitrary files by sending a crafted serialized MethodSpec object.
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 dataall versionsCVSS 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
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:A/AC:M/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.
-
Confirm device is Samsung Galaxy S5Check device model number in Settings > About Phone; look for model numbers SM-G900A, SM-G900P, SM-G900F, SM-G900H, SM-G900M, SM-G900T, or other G900 variantsAffected if Device model is any Samsung Galaxy S5 variant
-
Verify com.absolute.android.persistence package existsCheck installed system apps for 'Absolute Persistence' or use ADB command: pm list packages | grep absoluteAffected if The com.absolute.android.persistence package is installed on the device
-
Confirm MethodSpec class is presentUse ADB to check for the vulnerable class: adb shell pm path com.absolute.android.persistence then examine the APK for MethodSpec.classAffected if The MethodSpec class exists in the com.absolute.android.persistence package
-
Check if the Absolute Persistence app is enabledGo to Settings > Applications > All > find 'Absolute Persistence' or use ADB: dumpsys package com.absolute.android.persistenceAffected if The app is installed and enabled as a system application
-
Verify Android version running on deviceCheck Android version in Settings > About Phone > Android versionAffected if Device is running any Android version on a Galaxy S5 (all versions affected per vendor disclosure)
User is affected if running on a Samsung Galaxy S5 device with the com.absolute.android.persistence system app installed and enabled, as this pre-installed app contains the vulnerable MethodSpec class with the deserialization flaw.
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 dataApply Samsung firmware updates for Galaxy S5; if no update available, restrict app installation to trusted sources only and consider device replacement as this is a pre-installed system app vulnerability.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,336.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2015-4034 — 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-2015-4034 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