CVE-2019-2017
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_t2t_handle_tlv_detect_rsp of rw_t2t_ndef.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-121035711
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 T2T (Type 2 Tag) handler (rw_t2t_handle_tlv_detect_rsp in rw_t2t_ndef.cc) due to a missing bounds check when processing NDEF data. This allows local privilege escalation without additional execution privileges, though user interaction is required (presenting a malicious NFC tag to the device).
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= 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/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.
-
Verify Android versionCheck the device Android version via Settings > About Phone > Android version, or run 'getprop ro.build.version.release' in ADB shellAffected if The reported version is exactly 7.0, 7.1.1, 7.1.2, 8.0, or 9.0
-
Confirm NFC is enabledCheck if NFC is turned on in Settings > Connected devices > NFC, or run 'settings get secure nfc_enabled' in ADB shellAffected if NFC is enabled on the device - the vulnerability requires NFC to be active to process a malicious tag
-
Determine NFC stack version (optional)Review system logs or NFC service diagnostics via 'dumpsys nfc' in ADB shell to confirm the NFC stack versionAffected if Cannot reliably detect vulnerable code version without vendor patch information - version check in step 1 is primary indicator
A device is affected if it runs Android 7.0, 7.1.1, 7.1.2, 8.0, or 9.0 AND has NFC enabled, allowing a malicious NFC tag to trigger the out-of-bounds write in the T2T handler.
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 the affected versions (Android 7.0 through 9). This is a system-level vulnerability requiring a vendor patch; workarounds are limited to disabling NFC if feasible for the use case.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-2017 — 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-2019-2017 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