CVE-2020-9239
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 · uneditedHuawei smartphones BLA-A09 versions 8.0.0.123(C212),versions earlier than 8.0.0.123(C567),versions earlier than 8.0.0.123(C797);BLA-TL00B versions earlier than 8.1.0.326(C01);Berkeley-L09 versions earlier than 8.0.0.163(C10),versions earlier than 8.0.0.163(C432),Versions earlier than 8.0.0.163(C636),Versions earlier than 8.0.0.172(C10);Duke-L09 versions Duke-L09C10B187, versions Duke-L09C432B189, versions Duke-L09C636B189;HUAWEI P20 versions earlier than 8.0.1.16(C00);HUAWEI P20 Pro versions earlier than 8.1.0.152(C00);Jimmy-AL00A versions earlier than Jimmy-AL00AC00B172;LON-L29D versions LON-L29DC721B192;NEO-AL00D versions earlier than 8.1.0.172(C786);Stanford-AL00 versions Stanford-AL00C00B123;Toronto-AL00 versions earlier than Toronto-AL00AC00B225;Toronto-AL00A versions earlier than Toronto-AL00AC00B225;Toronto-TL10 versions earlier than Toronto-TL10C01B225 have an information vulnerability. A module has a design error that is lack of control of input. Attackers can exploit this vulnerab
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 design error exists in certain Huawei smartphone modules where input validation is insufficient, potentially allowing unauthorized access to sensitive information. The vulnerability stems from lack of proper control of input in a specific module, leading to an information disclosure risk.
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= 8.0.0.123\(c212\)< 8.0.0.123\(c567\)< 8.0.0.123\(c797\)< 8.1.0.326\(c01\)< 8.0.0.163\(c10\)<= 8.0.0.163\(c432\)< 8.0.0.163\(c636\)< 8.0.0.172\(c10\)= duke-l09c10b187= duke-l09c432b189= duke-l09c636b189< 8.0.1.16\(c00\)< 8.1.0.152\(c00\)< jimmy-al00ac00b172= lon-l29dc721b192CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/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.
-
Identify the device modelNavigate to Settings > About Phone on the Huawei device to determine the exact model number (e.g., Bla A09, P20, P20 Pro, etc.)Affected if The device model matches one of the affected models: Bla A09, Bla Tl00b, Berkeley L09, Duke L09, P20, P20 Pro, Jimmy Al00a, or Lon L29d
-
Locate the firmware versionIn Settings > About Phone, note the displayed Firmware version/build number (e.g., 8.0.0.123(c212), 8.1.0.326(c01), etc.)Affected if A firmware version is installed on the device
-
Compare firmware against Bla A09 affected versionsIf model is Bla A09, compare installed version against: = 8.0.0.123(c212), < 8.0.0.123(c567), or < 8.0.0.123(c797)Affected if Installed version equals 8.0.0.123(c212) or is lower than 8.0.0.123(c567) or 8.0.0.123(c797)
-
Compare firmware against Bla Tl00b, P20, P20 Pro, Jimmy Al00a affected versionsFor Bla Tl00b check < 8.1.0.326(c01); for P20 check < 8.0.1.16(c00); for P20 Pro check < 8.1.0.152(c00); for Jimmy Al00a check < jimmy-al00ac00b172Affected if Installed version is lower than the specific threshold for that model
-
Compare firmware against Berkeley L09 and Duke L09 affected versionsFor Berkeley L09 check against: < 8.0.0.163(c10), <= 8.0.0.163(c432), < 8.0.0.163(c636), or < 8.0.0.172(c10); for Duke L09 check if version equals duke-l09c10b187, duke-l09c432b189, or duke-l09c636b189Affected if Installed version matches any of the specific build numbers listed for these models
-
Check for Lon L29d specific buildIf model is Lon L29d, verify if firmware version equals lon-l29dc721b192Affected if Installed version is exactly lon-l29dc721b192
The device is affected if its model matches any affected Huawei model AND its installed firmware version falls within the specified vulnerable ranges for that model.
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 data8.0.0.1238.0.0.1638.0.0.172
Apply the vendor-supplied firmware updates (8.0.0.123 or later for BLA-A09, 8.1.0.326 or later for BLA-TL00B, 8.0.0.163 or later for Berkeley-L09, etc.) to all affected devices.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $1,648.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-9239 — 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-2020-9239 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