CVE-2017-8204
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 Bastet driver of Honor 9 Huawei smart phones with software of versions earlier than Stanford-AL10C00B175 has a buffer overflow vulnerability due to the lack of parameter validation. An attacker tricks a user into installing a malicious APP which has the root privilege; the APP can send a specific parameter to the driver of the smart phone, causing arbitrary code execution
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 confidenceBuffer overflow vulnerability in the Bastet driver of Honor 9 smartphones. A malicious application with root privileges can send specially crafted parameters to the driver, bypassing validation checks and triggering the overflow, leading to arbitrary code execution in kernel context.
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< stanford-al10c00b175CVSS 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
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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 Honor 9 device modelCheck device model number in Settings > About Phone > Model Number. Confirm it is Honor 9 (model variants may include stanford-al10, stanford-al20, etc.)Affected if Device is not an Honor 9 smartphone - this vulnerability only affects Honor 9 models
-
Check firmware versionNavigate to Settings > About Phone > Version. Look for the build number or firmware version string (may appear as 'stanford-al10c00xxx' or similar)Affected if Firmware version begins with stanford-al10c00b175 or higher - versions starting with stanford-al10c00b175 or later are patched. Versions lower than stanford-al10c00b175 are affected
-
Verify Bastet driver presenceUse a terminal app with root access to check /dev or /sys for bastet driver entries, or run 'lsmod | grep bastet' if the driver is loadable as a kernel moduleAffected if Bastet driver is present and loaded - the vulnerability exists in this driver; if the driver is not present, the attack surface may not exist
-
Check for root privilege exposureVerify if any untrusted applications have been granted superuser/root privileges. Check in Settings > Apps > superuser or using a root checker utilityAffected if Untrusted or unknown applications have root/superuser access - a malicious root application is required to exploit this vulnerability
You are affected if you own an Honor 9 with firmware version below stanford-al10c00b175 and the Bastet driver is present on your device.
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 dataUpdate Honor 9 firmware to Stanford-AL10C00B175 or later version which contains the patched Bastet driver with proper parameter validation.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing10.0 h
- Review / QA6.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $9,504.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-8204 — 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-2017-8204 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