CVE-2018-13901
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 · uneditedDue to missing permissions in Android Manifest file, Sensitive information disclosure issue can happen in PCI RCS app in Snapdragon Auto, Snapdragon Connectivity, Snapdragon Consumer IOT, Snapdragon Industrial IOT, Snapdragon IoT, Snapdragon Mobile, Snapdragon Voice & Music, Snapdragon Wearables in MDM9206, MDM9607, MDM9650, MSM8909W, MSM8996AU, QCA6574AU, QCS605, SD 210/SD 212/SD 205, SD 615/16/SD 415, SD 636, SD 650/52, SD 675, SD 712 / SD 710 / SD 670, SD 730, SD 820, SD 820A, SD 835, SD 845 / SD 850, SD 855, SDA660, SDM630, SDM660
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 vulnerability stems from missing permission declarations in the AndroidManifest.xml file of the PCI RCS (Rich Communication Services) app. Without proper permission definitions, the app may unintentionally expose sensitive information or allow unauthorized access to protected data and device capabilities. The issue affects multiple Qualcomm Snapdragon chipset platforms used in mobile, IoT, automotive, and wearable devices.
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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
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 device specifications or use commands like 'cat /proc/cpuinfo' on Android devices to confirm the chipset matches one of the affected models: Mdm9206, Mdm9607, Mdm9650, Msm8909w, Msm8996au, Qca6574au, Qcs605, or Sd 210Affected if The device uses any of the listed Qualcomm chipset models
-
Verify the PCI RCS app is installedCheck for the presence of the PCI RCS (Rich Communication Services) app on the device. This may be located in /system/app/ or /data/app/ directories, or identified via package manager: 'pm list packages | grep -i rcs'Affected if The PCI RCS app is present on the device
-
Locate and inspect the PCI RCS AndroidManifest.xmlRetrieve the AndroidManifest.xml file from the PCI RCS app package (APK or installed app). Use 'aapt dump badging <rcs_apk>' or decompile the APK to examine the manifest file for permission declarationsAffected if The AndroidManifest.xml is accessible and can be examined
-
Check for missing sensitive permissions in the manifestReview the AndroidManifest.xml for critical permissions that should be declared for RCS functionality, including but not limited to: READ_PHONE_STATE, READ_CONTACTS, SEND_SMS, RECEIVE_SMS, READ_SMS, RECORD_AUDIO, CAMERA, ACCESS_FINE_LOCATION. Compare against what the app functionality should requireAffected if The manifest is missing permission declarations that are necessary for proper RCS app functionality, exposing sensitive data or device capabilities without appropriate protection
A user is affected if their device uses one of the listed Qualcomm chipsets AND has the PCI RCS app installed with incomplete or missing permission declarations in its AndroidManifest.xml
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 the AndroidManifest.xml file to include all required permission declarations for the PCI RCS app, ensuring proper protection of sensitive data and compliance with Android security best practices. Validate that all needed permissions (e.g., READ_PHONE_STATE, READ_CONTACTS, etc.) are correctly defined with appropriate protection levels.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,936.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-13901 — 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-2018-13901 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