CVE-2020-11269
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 · uneditedPossible memory corruption while processing EAPOL frames due to lack of validation of key length before using it in Snapdragon Auto, Snapdragon Compute, Snapdragon Connectivity, Snapdragon Consumer Electronics Connectivity, Snapdragon Consumer IOT, Snapdragon Industrial IOT, Snapdragon IoT, Snapdragon Mobile, Snapdragon Voice & Music, Snapdragon Wearables, Snapdragon Wired Infrastructure and Networking
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 · moderate confidenceMemory corruption vulnerability in Qualcomm Snapdragon WiFi firmware where EAPOL (Extensible Authentication Protocol over LAN) frames are processed without validating key length before using it, potentially leading to buffer overflow and arbitrary code execution.
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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/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 your device chipsetCheck the device specifications, system information, or hardware documentation to determine if the Qualcomm Snapdragon chipset model is one of: Apq8009, Apq8009w, Apq8016, Apq8017, Apq8037, Apq8039, Apq8052, or Apq8053Affected if The device uses any of the listed Qualcomm Apq* chipset models
-
Check WiFi firmware versionAccess the device's WiFi firmware or baseband information through system settings, diagnostic tools, or vendor documentation to retrieve the firmware versionAffected if The WiFi firmware version corresponds to an affected chipset listed above (all versions are affected)
-
Verify WiFi functionality is enabledCheck whether WiFi is turned on or available on the device through system settings, network configuration, or command-line tools like 'iwconfig' or 'nmcli'Affected if WiFi is enabled and operational on the device
-
Confirm WPA/WPA2 authentication is in useInspect the current WiFi connection settings or network configuration to determine if the authentication protocol is set to WPA or WPA2 (which use EAPOL for key exchange)Affected if The WiFi connection uses WPA or WPA2 security protocols
Your environment is affected if the device contains any of the listed Qualcomm Snapdragon chipsets (Apq8009 through Apq8053) and has WiFi enabled, since all firmware versions of these chipsets contain the vulnerability.
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 updates for affected Snapdragon devices; this is a firmware-level flaw that cannot be mitigated through configuration changes alone.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing12.0 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 $7,616.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-11269 — 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-2020-11269 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