CVE-2020-9254
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 Pro smartphones with versions earlier than 10.1.0.123(C432E19R2P5patch02), versions earlier than 10.1.0.126(C10E11R5P1), and versions earlier than 10.1.0.160(C00E160R2P8) have a logic check error vulnerability. A logic error occurs when the software checking the size of certain parameter, the attacker should trick the user into installing a malicious application, successful exploit may cause code execution.
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 check error exists in HUAWEI P30 Pro smartphones where the software fails to properly validate the size of certain parameters. An attacker exploits this by tricking the user into installing a malicious application, which can trigger the logic error and achieve 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 data< 10.1.0.123\(c432e19r2p5patch02\)< 10.1.0.126\(c10e11r5p1\)< 10.1.0.160\(c00e160r2p8\)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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/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 device modelGo to Settings > About Phone > Model Number on the HUAWEI P30 Pro deviceAffected if Device is not an HUAWEI P30 Pro smartphone
-
Check firmware build numberGo to Settings > About Phone > Build Number to view the current firmware version installedAffected if Firmware version cannot be determined or is not visible in settings
-
Determine CUST variantCheck the build number format - it contains a variant identifier (C432, C10, or C00) in the version stringAffected if The variant identifier cannot be determined from the build number
-
Compare version against affected rangesCompare the installed version number to the affected thresholds: for C432 compare to 10.1.0.123(C432E19R2P5patch02), for C10 compare to 10.1.0.126(C10E11R5P1), for C00 compare to 10.1.0.160(C00E160R2P8)Affected if Installed version is lower than the corresponding threshold for the detected variant
A user is affected if they are running an HUAWEI P30 Pro with firmware version lower than 10.1.0.123(C432), 10.1.0.126(C10), or 10.1.0.160(C00) depending on their build variant.
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 data10.1.0.12310.1.0.12610.1.0.160
Users should update their HUAWEI P30 Pro to version 10.1.0.123(C432E19R2P5patch02) or later for C432, 10.1.0.126(C10E11R5P1) or later for C10, and 10.1.0.160(C00E160R2P8) or later for C00. Additionally, users should avoid installing applications from untrusted sources.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $2,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-9254 — 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-2020-9254 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