CVE-2018-9593
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 llcp_dlc_proc_i_pdu of llcp_dlc.cc in Android-7.0, Android-7.1.1, Android-7.1.2, Android-8.0, Android-8.1 and Android-9, there is a possible out of bounds read due to an incorrect bounds check. This could lead to local information disclosure over NFC with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation. Android ID: A-116722267.
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 read vulnerability in the NFC LLCP (Logical Link Control Protocol) stack in Android. The llcp_dlc_proc_i_pdu function in llcp_dlc.cc performs an incorrect bounds check when processing incoming PDUs, allowing reading beyond allocated buffer boundaries. This enables local information disclosure over NFC without requiring privileges or user interaction.
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= 7.0= 7.1.1= 7.1.2= 8.0= 8.1= 9.0CVSS 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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/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.
-
Check Android OS versionGo to Settings > About Phone (or About Device) and locate the Android version field. Compare this to the affected versions: 7.0, 7.1.1, 7.1.2, 8.0, 8.1, or 9.0.Affected if The device runs any of these exact Android versions.
-
Verify NFC is enabledGo to Settings > Network & Internet (or Connections) > NFC. Check if NFC is turned on or enabled on the device.Affected if NFC is enabled - the vulnerable LLCP stack code path becomes active when NFC is on.
-
Confirm NFC service is runningOpen Settings > Apps > Running Services (or use ADB command 'adb shell dumpsys nfc' to check NFC service status). Look for the NFC service as active or running.Affected if The NFC service is actively running - this indicates the vulnerable code is loaded in memory.
-
Inspect NFC logs for PDU processingUse ADB to run 'adb logcat | grep -i llcp' or 'adb shell dumpsys nfc' while NFC is active. Look for llcp_dlc_proc_i_pdu related activity or PDU handling messages.Affected if PDU processing logs appear - this confirms the vulnerable function is being exercised during NFC communication.
A device is affected if it runs Android 7.0, 7.1.1, 7.1.2, 8.0, 8.1, or 9.0, has NFC enabled, and actively uses NFC (which triggers the vulnerable LLCP stack code path).
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 the Android security patch for CVE-2018-9593 (November 2018 bulletin). For custom Android builds, patch the bounds check logic in llcp_dlc.cc to properly validate buffer indices before memory access.
- Consultation5.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA5.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,264.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-9593 — 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-2018-9593 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