CVE-2020-3640
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 · uneditedu'Resizing the usage table header before passing all the checks leads to the function exiting with a usage table in invalid state when a HLOS adversary calls the function with wrong input' in Snapdragon Compute, Snapdragon Consumer IOT, Snapdragon Mobile, Snapdragon Wired Infrastructure and Networking in Bitra, Kamorta, QCS404, QCS610, Rennell, Saipan, SC7180, SDX55, SM6150, SM7150, SM8250, SXR2130
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 confidenceA logic vulnerability exists in Qualcomm Snapdragon chips where the usage table header is resized before validation checks are performed. When an attacker provides malformed input, the function exits prematurely leaving the usage table in an invalid state. This appears to be a sequencing flaw where state mutation occurs prior to input validation, potentially allowing a local adversary to cause denial of service or undefined behavior.
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
- 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.
-
Identify the Snapdragon chip model in the systemUse system commands such as 'lspci', 'lsusb', 'cat /proc/cpuinfo', or OEM-provided diagnostic tools to identify the Qualcomm Snapdragon chip present. For embedded systems, check the BOM (Bill of Materials) or hardware specifications.Affected if The chip model is one of: Bitra, Kamorta, QCS404, QCS610, Rennell, Saipan, SC7180, or SDX55.
-
Determine the firmware version of the affected Snapdragon componentConsult OEM vendor documentation for firmware version retrieval methods. Common approaches include: accessing the bootloader/UEFI configuration, using manufacturer diagnostic utilities, or checking /sys/firmware or similar system paths for firmware version strings. Compare against the affected product list.Affected if The device runs any firmware version of the affected products (all versions are affected per the CVE).
-
Verify if the usage table feature is operationalSince specific configuration details are not provided in this CVE, check system logs, diagnostic outputs, or OEM documentation for the usage table module. Look for any references to 'usage table', 'table header', or related subsystem initialization in firmware debug outputs.Affected if The usage table functionality is present and the system processes table headers, which is the vulnerable code path.
-
Review system logs for anomalies related to table handlingExamine system event logs, firmware logs, or kernel logs for entries indicating premature exit, validation failures, or table state corruption. Search for keywords: 'usage table', 'header', 'validation', 'exit', or undefined behavior indicators as documented by the OEM.Affected if Logs show unexpected function exits, validation errors, or inconsistent table states during firmware operation.
A system is affected if it contains a Qualcomm Snapdragon chip from the affected list (Bitra, Kamorta, QCS404, QCS610, Rennell, Saipan, SC7180, SDX55) running any firmware version, with the usage table functionality enabled and processing table headers.
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 dataVendor-provided firmware updates for affected Snapdragon chipsets are required. Organizations should apply patches from Qualcomm/OEM vendors and monitor for updates to affected components (Bitra, Kamorta, QCS404, QCS610, Rennell, Saipan, SC7180, SDX55, SM6150, SM7150, SM8250, SXR2130).
- 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-2020-3640 — 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-2020-3640 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