CVE-2015-9192
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 Android before 2018-04-05 or earlier security patch level on Qualcomm Snapdragon Automobile, Snapdragon Mobile, and Snapdragon Wear MDM9206, MDM9650, SD 210/SD 212/SD 205, SD 400, SD 410/12, SD 425, SD 430, SD 450, SD 615/16/SD 415, SD 617, SD 625, SD 650/52, SD 800, SD 808, SD 810, SD 820, SD 820A, SD 835, SD 845, and SD 850, out of bounds memory access vulnerability may occur in the content protection manager due to improper validation of incoming messages.
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 confidenceOut of bounds memory access vulnerability in the content protection manager component of affected Qualcomm Snapdragon chipsets. The root cause is improper validation of incoming messages, which allows an attacker to trigger memory corruption that could lead to arbitrary code execution or denial of service.
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 versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall 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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 device chipset modelCheck the processor/chipset information via device system info, /proc/cpuinfo, or AT command interface (for modems: AT+CGMM or AT+CGINFO). Look for model identifiers: Mdm9206, Mdm9650, Sd 210, Sd 212, Sd 205, Sd 400, Sd 410, or Sd 412.Affected if The chipset matches any of the listed models (Mdm9206, Mdm9650, Sd 210, Sd 212, Sd 205, Sd 400, Sd 410, Sd 412).
-
Verify the content protection manager component is presentCheck if the content protection manager service/module is running on the device. This may be visible in running processes, system logs, or via vendor-specific diagnostic interfaces. Look for processes or services related to DRM or content protection.Affected if The content protection manager component is present and active on the device.
-
Confirm firmware version if accessibleRetrieve the firmware version through vendor-specific diagnostic tools, AT commands (AT+CGMR for modem firmware), or system build information. Compare against the affected product list.Affected if The firmware version corresponds to any of the listed products (all versions of Mdm9206, Mdm9650, Sd 210, Sd 212, Sd 205, Sd 400, Sd 410, Sd 412).
The device is affected if it uses any of the listed Qualcomm Snapdragon chipset models (Mdm9206, Mdm9650, Sd 210, Sd 212, Sd 205, Sd 400, Sd 410, Sd 412) and the content protection manager component is present, as all firmware versions of these products are vulnerable.
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.
dbcve · scopedApply the Android security patch level from 2018-04-05 or later, or obtain device/vendor-specific firmware updates that address this vulnerability in the content protection manager.
Android security update with 2018-04-05 patch level or later (contact device manufacturer for specific Android version)
- Check the current Android security patch level on the device by going to Settings > About Phone > Security patch level
- If the security patch level is earlier than 2018-04-05, update the device to the latest available Android version
- Apply any available firmware updates from the device manufacturer that include the 2018-04-05 or later security patch level
- After updating, verify the security patch level reflects April 2018 or later in Settings > About Phone > Security patch level
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $4,672.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2015-9192 — 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-2015-9192 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