CVE-2019-9242
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 NFC, there is a possible out of bounds read due to a missing bounds check. This could lead to local information disclosure with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is needed for exploitation. Product: AndroidVersions: Android-10Android ID: A-121035878
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 confidenceIn Android 10's NFC subsystem, a missing bounds check allows an out-of-bounds read when processing certain NFC data. This enables local information disclosure without requiring additional privileges, but user interaction (such as tapping a malicious NFC tag) is required to trigger the vulnerability.
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= 10.0CVSS 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
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/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 versionGo to Settings > About Phone > Android version (or run 'getprop ro.build.version.release' via ADB). Verify the version is exactly 10.0.Affected if The device is running Android 10.0 (exact version match)
-
Verify NFC is enabledGo to Settings > Network & Internet > NFC (or Settings > Connections > NFC) and check if NFC is turned on. Alternatively, run 'settings get secure nfc_on' via ADB.Affected if NFC is enabled on the device (value returns 1 or is toggled on)
-
Check security patch levelGo to Settings > About Phone > Security patch level (or run 'getprop ro.build.version.security_patch' via ADB). Compare the date to the Android 10 security patch release for this CVE.Affected if The security patch level is earlier than the fix release date for CVE-2019-9242, meaning the bounds check is not yet applied
The environment is affected if the device runs Android 10.0, has NFC enabled, and is missing the Android 10 security patch that addresses this bounds check vulnerability in the NFC subsystem.
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 10 security patch (available via system update) which includes the bounds check fix in the NFC component. Users should keep their devices updated and avoid tapping untrusted NFC tags.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $2,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2019-9242 — 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-2019-9242 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