CVE-2022-20596
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 · uneditedIn sendChunk of WirelessCharger.cpp, there is a possible out of bounds write due to a missing bounds check. This could lead to local escalation of privilege with System execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.Product: AndroidVersions: Android kernelAndroid ID: A-239700400References: N/A
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 is a buffer overflow vulnerability in Android's WirelessCharger driver where the sendChunk function lacks proper bounds checking before writing data to a buffer. An out-of-bounds write occurs because the code does not validate buffer limits, potentially allowing a privileged attacker to corrupt memory and escalate privileges.
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 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
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/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 Android versionCheck the device settings under Settings > About Phone > Android version, or run 'getprop ro.build.version.release' via ADBAffected if The device runs any version of Google Android (all versions are affected)
-
Verify the WirelessCharger driver presenceCheck for the wireless charger kernel module or driver file. On Android this may appear in /sys/class/power_supply/ or as a kernel module. Use 'ls -la /sys/class/power_supply/' via ADB shell to enumerate power supply driversAffected if The WirelessCharger driver is present and loaded on the device
-
Confirm wireless charging functionality is enabledCheck if wireless charging is active or available. Look in Settings > Battery > Wireless charging, or check /sys/class/power_supply/wireless/ via ADB for the presence of wireless power supply entriesAffected if Wireless charging is enabled or the wireless power supply interface exists on the device
-
Check the Android security patch levelRun 'getprop ro.build.version.security_patch' via ADB shell to retrieve the security patch date. Compare this date to the patch release date for CVE-2022-20596Affected if The security patch level is earlier than the month the CVE fix was released, indicating the vulnerability is present
A device is affected if it runs Google Android, has the WirelessCharger driver loaded, has wireless charging enabled, and has not received the security patch addressing CVE-2022-20596
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 the Android security patch that addresses CVE-2022-20596; until then, minimize exposure by restricting device access to trusted networks and keeping System privileges tightly controlled.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,080.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-20596 — 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-2022-20596 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