CVE-2021-1919
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 · uneditedInteger underflow can occur when the RTCP length is lesser than than the actual blocks present in Snapdragon Auto, Snapdragon Compute, Snapdragon Connectivity, Snapdragon Consumer IOT, Snapdragon Industrial IOT, Snapdragon IoT, Snapdragon Voice & Music, Snapdragon Wearables
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 confidenceInteger underflow vulnerability in RTCP packet parsing where the length field indicates fewer bytes than actually present in the packet. This can cause memory corruption during the parsing process, potentially leading to remote code execution or 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 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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/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 Qualcomm chipset modelCheck the processor/hardware information on the device (e.g., /proc/cpuinfo on Android, or system information on embedded devices). Look for APQ8009, APQ8009W, APQ8017, APQ8037, APQ8053, APQ8084, APQ8096AU, or AQT1000.Affected if The device uses any of the listed Qualcomm APQ chipset models.
-
Verify RTCP packet processing is enabledCheck if the device or application processes RTCP (Real-time Transport Control Protocol) packets. This is typically found in VoIP, video conferencing, or streaming applications using RTP. Review network service configurations or application settings that handle RTP/RTCP.Affected if RTCP packet parsing is enabled and the device processes incoming RTCP traffic.
-
Inspect network traffic for malformed RTCP packetsCapture and analyze network traffic using tools like Wireshark or tcpdump. Look for RTCP packets where the length field is smaller than the actual packet size, which could trigger the integer underflow.Affected if Malformed RTCP packets are observed in network captures.
-
Check for unexpected memory behavior or crashesReview system logs, kernel logs, or application crash logs for memory corruption indicators or unexpected process termination related to RTP/RTCP handling.Affected if Memory corruption or crashes occur in network processing modules handling RTCP.
A device is affected if it uses any of the listed Qualcomm APQ chipsets (Apq8009, Apq8009w, Apq8017, Apq8037, Apq8053, Apq8084, Apq8096au, Aqt1000) and processes RTCP packets.
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 dataApply firmware updates provided by Qualcomm for affected Snapdragon platforms. Users should check with device manufacturers for available security patches.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA6.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,192.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2021-1919 — 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-2021-1919 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