CVE-2020-9249
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 P30 smartphones with versions earlier than 10.1.0.160(C00E160R2P11) have a denial of service vulnerability. A module does not deal with mal-crafted messages and it leads to memory leak. Attackers can exploit this vulnerability to make the device denial of service.Affected product versions include: HUAWEI P30 versions Versions earlier than 10.1.0.160(C00E160R2P11).
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 confidenceHUAWEI P30 smartphones running firmware versions earlier than 10.1.0.160(C00E160R2P11) contain a vulnerability in a message handling module that fails to properly process malformed messages, causing a memory leak that leads to denial of service.
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< 10.1.0.160\(c00e160r2p11\)CVSS 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
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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 device modelGo to Settings > About Phone > Model Number and verify the device is HUAWEI P30Affected if The device model is not HUAWEI P30
-
Check the installed firmware versionGo to Settings > About Phone > Version and locate the build number or firmware version stringAffected if Unable to retrieve the firmware version information
-
Compare version against affected rangeCompare the installed firmware version to 10.1.0.160(C00E160R2P11). The version format typically appears as a build number or in the format shown in About Phone.Affected if The installed version is earlier than 10.1.0.160(C00E160R2P11) or the version string is not visible for comparison
-
Verify the message module is accessibleConfirm the stock Messaging app or message handling functionality is available on the deviceAffected if The messaging module is present and can receive messages
A user is affected if the device is a HUAWEI P30 running firmware version earlier than 10.1.0.160(C00E160R2P11) with the messaging module enabled.
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 data10.1.0.160
Upgrade HUAWEI P30 firmware to version 10.1.0.160(C00E160R2P11) or later to patch the vulnerability.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing1.0 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 $1,200.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-9249 — 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-2020-9249 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