CVE-2019-2015
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 rw_t3t_act_handle_check_rsp of rw_t3t.cc, there is a possible out-of-bound write due to a missing bounds check. This could lead to local escalation of privilege with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is needed for exploitation.Product: AndroidVersions: Android-7.0 Android-7.1.1 Android-7.1.2 Android-8.0 Android-8.1 Android-9Android ID: A-120503926
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 confidenceAn out-of-bounds write vulnerability exists in the NFC T3T (Tag Type 3) response handler (rw_t3t_act_handle_check_rsp in rw_t3t.cc) due to a missing bounds check. This memory corruption issue can be exploited locally to escalate privileges without additional execution privileges, though user interaction is required.
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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/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.
-
Confirm Android version is affectedCheck the device Settings > About Phone > Android version. Confirm it matches 7.0, 7.1.1, 7.1.2, 8.0, 8.1, or 9.0Affected if The Android version is exactly one of these listed versions (7.0, 7.1.1, 7.1.2, 8.0, 8.1, or 9.0)
-
Verify NFC is enabledCheck Settings > Network & Internet > NFC (or Settings > Connections > NFC on some devices). Confirm the NFC toggle is turned onAffected if NFC is enabled on the device, as the vulnerable code path in the T3T response handler is only reached when NFC is active
-
Check if device receives monthly security updatesCheck Settings > About Phone > Security patch level. Compare the date against the A-120503926 fix release date in the applicable Android security bulletinAffected if The Security patch level is earlier than the patch containing the fix (or no patch has been applied), meaning the bounds check fix is not present
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 is missing the A-120503926 security patch that adds bounds validation in rw_t3t.cc
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 relevant Android security patch (A-120503926) from the monthly bulletin. The fix requires adding proper bounds validation before the write operation in the affected function.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $3,552.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-2015 — 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-2019-2015 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