CVE-2019-14078
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 · uneditedOut of bound memory access while processing qpay due to not validating length of the response buffer provided by User. in Snapdragon Auto, Snapdragon Compute, Snapdragon Consumer IOT, Snapdragon Industrial IOT, Snapdragon Mobile, Snapdragon Voice & Music, Snapdragon Wired Infrastructure and Networking in APQ8009, APQ8098, MSM8909, MSM8998, SDA660, SDA845, SDM630, SDM636, SDM660, SDM845
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 Snapdragon processors when processing qpay operations. The flaw stems from failure to validate the length of a response buffer provided by user input, allowing memory corruption. Exploitable on multiple Snapdragon chip generations affecting mobile, IoT, automotive, and infrastructure products.
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
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/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 Snapdragon processor modelCheck the device or system specifications, or run commands like 'cat /proc/cpuinfo' on Linux-based embedded systems, or check 'lspci' output, or review the board/BOM documentation to determine the exact chipset variantAffected if The processor model matches one of the following: Apq8009, Apq8098, Msm8909, Msm8998, Sda660, Sda845, Sdm630, or Sdm636
-
Determine if qpay functionality is presentInvestigate whether the qpay module, service, or operation is enabled or available on the system. This may involve checking system services, loaded modules, or application configurations that interact with payment or qpay-related processingAffected if The qpay operation or related processing feature is present and accessible on the device or system
-
Verify the firmware version for inventoryRetrieve the firmware version through vendor-specific tools, system information interfaces, or by consulting device documentation from the manufacturerAffected if Any firmware version is returned, confirming the affected chipset is in use (all versions of the listed chipsets are affected)
A user is affected if their device or system contains a Qualcomm Snapdragon chipset from the affected list (Apq8009, Apq8098, Msm8909, Msm8998, Sda660, Sda845, Sdm630, Sdm636) and the qpay processing capability is present on that system.
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 vendor firmware patches from Qualcomm; coordinate with device manufacturers for patch deployment to affected endpoints.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $5,120.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-14078 — 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-2019-14078 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