CVE-2015-9021
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 · uneditedIn all Android releases from CAF using the Linux kernel, access control to SMEM memory was not enabled.
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 · moderate confidenceThis vulnerability in Android CAF Linux kernels lacked access control enforcement for SMEM (Shared Memory) regions, allowing unauthorized processes to potentially read or write to shared memory that should be protected.
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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
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 kernel type and versionCheck /proc/version or 'un -a' output for 'CAF' (Code Aurora Forum) or 'Linux' kernel strings, and note the exact version numberAffected if The kernel is a CAF build and the version falls within the affected range (or if version cannot be determined but CAF kernel is confirmed)
-
Determine if SMEM is in useCheck for SMEM-related kernel config options in /boot/config-* or via 'grep -i smem /proc/config.gz' if available, or look for smem entries in /proc/meminfoAffected if SMEM (Shared Memory) is enabled and accessible on the system
-
Verify SMEM access control configurationExamine /sys/module/smem*/parameters/* or check for smem access control files in /proc/smem/ and verify if proper ACLs or security modules are restricting accessAffected if SMEM regions can be accessed without proper access control restrictions or the access control configuration is missing or misconfigured
-
Check for unauthorized SMEM access capabilityAttempt to read SMEM region files if accessible (e.g., in /proc/smem/) or check system logs for any smem-related access attemptsAffected if Non-privileged processes can read or write to SMEM regions without proper authorization checks
The environment is affected if running a CAF-based Android Linux kernel with SMEM enabled and lacking proper access control enforcement for SMEM regions.
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 dataEnable and configure proper access control mechanisms for SMEM memory regions in the Linux kernel, typically requiring kernel-level changes and security module configuration.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation24.0 h
- Testing16.0 h
- Review / QA8.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $15,616.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2015-9021 — 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-2015-9021 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