CVE-2021-1950
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 · uneditedImproper cleaning of secure memory between authenticated users can lead to face authentication bypass in Snapdragon Auto, Snapdragon Compute, Snapdragon Connectivity, Snapdragon Industrial IOT, Snapdragon Mobile, Snapdragon Wired Infrastructure and Networking
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 confidenceThis vulnerability involves improper cleanup of secure memory between authenticated users in Snapdragon chipset firmware, which can allow face authentication to be bypassed. The issue stems from residual biometric data or authentication state not being properly cleared from secure memory when switching between users, potentially allowing an unauthorized user to access the device through the facial recognition system.
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 device Qualcomm chipset modelCheck device specifications in Settings > About Phone > Hardware/Model, or use FCC ID lookup at fccid.io, or run 'getprop ro.hardware' via ADBAffected if The chipset model matches Ar8035, Csr8811, Ipq6000, Ipq6005, Ipq6010, Ipq6018, Ipq6028, or Qca4024
-
Verify face authentication is enrolledNavigate to Settings > Security > Face Unlock or Settings > Face ID and check if a face profile is set upAffected if Face authentication has at least one face enrolled as a biometric credential
-
Confirm face unlock is enabled as an unlock methodCheck Settings > Security > Screen Lock and verify Face Unlock or Face ID is listed as an active lock methodAffected if Face authentication is enabled as a device unlock mechanism (not just for app authentication)
-
Check the baseband firmware versionGo to Settings > About Phone > Baseband version or run 'getprop gsm.version.baseband' via ADBAffected if The baseband version cannot be easily updated by users - patches must come through manufacturer OS updates (for affected chipsets, all versions are vulnerable)
A device is affected if it uses any of the listed Qualcomm chipset models and has face authentication enabled as an unlock method, regardless of firmware version since all versions are vulnerable.
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 Qualcomm-supplied firmware patches delivered through device manufacturer operating system updates; users should ensure their devices are running the latest OS version with the latest security patches installed.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $8,320.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2021-1950 — 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-2021-1950 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