CVE-2020-35555
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 · uneditedAn issue was discovered on LG mobile devices with Android OS 10 software. When a dual-screen configuration is supported, the device does not lock upon disconnection of a call with the cover closed. The LG ID is LVE-SMP-200027 (December 2020).
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 confidenceOn LG mobile devices with Android OS 10 that support dual-screen configurations, the device fails to auto-lock when a call is disconnected while the cover (flip cover) is closed. This leaves the device in an unlocked state, potentially allowing unauthorized physical access.
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
- 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.
-
Confirm device is an LG mobile deviceCheck the device manufacturer through Settings > About Phone > Manufacturer or Brand, or use 'getprop ro.product.manufacturer' via ADBAffected if Device is not an LG-branded phone
-
Verify Android OS version is 10.0Check Settings > About Phone > Android Version, or use 'getprop ro.build.version.release' via ADBAffected if Android version is anything other than 10.0 exactly
-
Confirm device supports dual-screen or flip cover configurationCheck device specifications for dual-screen support, or inspect Settings for 'Dual Screen' or 'Flip Cover' options in connectivity or accessory settings, or use 'getprop' to check for lg.dual.screen or similar propertiesAffected if Device does not have dual-screen or flip cover capability
-
Test auto-lock behavior after call termination with cover closedMake a phone call, then close the flip cover while the call is active, end the call while the cover remains closed, and observe whether the device automatically locks within a reasonable timeframe (30-60 seconds)Affected if Device remains unlocked after call ends with flip cover closed
User is affected if they have an LG device running Android 10.0 with dual-screen/flip cover support, and the device fails to auto-lock after a call ends while the flip cover is closed.
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 dataLG should release a firmware/software patch to correct the auto-lock behavior after call termination. Until the patch is available, users should manually lock the device or avoid using the cover configuration after calls.
- Consultation4.0 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 $3,872.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-35555 — 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-2020-35555 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