CVE-2018-11271
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 · uneditedImproper authentication can happen on Remote command handling due to inappropriate handling of events in Snapdragon Auto, Snapdragon Compute, Snapdragon Connectivity, Snapdragon Consumer IOT, Snapdragon Industrial IOT, Snapdragon IoT, Snapdragon Mobile, Snapdragon Wearables in MDM9206, MDM9607, MDM9650, MSM8909W, MSM8996AU, QCS605, Qualcomm 215, SD 210/SD 212/SD 205, SD 425, SD 427, SD 430, SD 435, SD 439 / SD 429, SD 450, SD 615/16/SD 415, SD 625, SD 632, SD 636, SD 650/52, SD 675, SD 712 / SD 710 / SD 670, SD 820, SD 820A, SD 835, SD 845 / SD 850, SD 855, SDA660, SDM439, SDM630, SDM660, SM7150, Snapdragon_High_Med_2016, SXR1130
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 involves improper authentication in remote command handling within Qualcomm Snapdragon chipsets. The authentication bypass occurs due to inappropriate handling of events, potentially allowing remote attackers to execute commands without proper authentication. The issue affects a wide range of Snapdragon platforms used in mobile devices, IoT devices, wearables, and automotive systems.
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 chipset modelDetermine the Qualcomm Snapdragon or MDM chipset used in the device. This information is typically found in device specifications, hardware documentation, or by accessing the device's system information or bootloader information.Affected if The device uses any of the following chipsets: Mdm9206, Mdm9607, Mdm9650, Msm8909w, Msm8996au, Qcs605, Qm215, or Sd 210.
-
Determine firmware versionAccess the device's firmware version information through manufacturer documentation, device settings, or by querying the system via debugging interfaces if available. Compare the installed firmware version against the affected product list.Affected if The device firmware is for any of the listed affected products (all versions of Mdm9206, Mdm9607, Mdm9650, Msm8909w, Msm8996au, Qcs605, Qm215, or Sd 210).
-
Check for exposed remote command interfacesReview network configuration and listening services on the device. Look for remote management interfaces, command listeners, or network services that accept remote commands. Use network scanning tools to identify open ports that may handle remote commands.Affected if The device has network-accessible interfaces that handle remote commands or management functions enabled and exposed.
-
Inspect authentication configuration for remote servicesExamine the device configuration files and settings related to authentication for remote access or command handling services. Check whether authentication is properly enforced for remote command interfaces.Affected if Remote command handling services are configured with weak, disabled, or improperly implemented authentication, or if authentication can be bypassed for remote command execution.
A device is affected if it contains any of the listed Qualcomm chipset models (Mdm9206, Mdm9607, Mdm9650, Msm8909w, Msm8996au, Qcs605, Qm215, or Sd 210) and has remote command handling services exposed or accessible, especially if authentication mechanisms are not properly enforced.
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 firmware updates from device vendors or Qualcomm as they become available. For IoT and legacy devices that may not receive updates, consider network segmentation and monitoring for indicators of compromise, and evaluate device replacement if patches are unavailable.
- Consultation12.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $9,216.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-11271 — 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-2018-11271 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