CVE-2022-20598
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 sec_media_protect of media.c, there is a possible EoP due to an integer overflow. This could lead to local escalation of privilege of secure mode MFC Core with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.Product: AndroidVersions: Android kernelAndroid ID: A-242357514References: 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 confidenceAn integer overflow vulnerability in the sec_media_protect function of media.c within the Android kernel allows local privilege escalation to secure mode MFC Core without user interaction. The overflow enables bypassing security boundaries in the media protection subsystem.
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
- 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 Android kernel versionRun 'uname -r' or check /proc/version to retrieve the kernel version stringAffected if The device runs an Android kernel without the A-242357514 patch applied to the media.c file
-
Locate the sec_media_protect function in the kernelSearch the kernel source or binary for the sec_media_protect function in media.c (e.g., 'grep -r sec_media_protect' in kernel source or check /proc/kallsyms if available)Affected if The sec_media_protect function exists in the kernel's media driver and the integer overflow check is not implemented
-
Verify MFC (Multi-Format Codec) hardware support is presentCheck kernel configuration for MFC support (CONFIG_MFC or similar) or query hardware info via /proc/cpuinfo or device-specific nodes in /dev or /sysAffected if The device has MFC hardware and the media protection subsystem is accessible to the vulnerable code path
-
Confirm the media protection subsystem is activeInspect /sys or /dev entries related to media/graphics (e.g., /dev/video* nodes or sec_media_* device nodes) or check SELinux policy for media domain accessAffected if The media protection subsystem is enabled and the sec_media_protect function can be invoked
The device is affected if it runs an Android kernel containing the sec_media_protect function in media.c with MFC hardware support and the media protection subsystem active, without the A-242357514 integer overflow patch applied.
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 kernel security patch for A-242357514. If no patch available, implement proper integer overflow checks in sec_media_protect before arithmetic operations that affect memory allocation or array indexing.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-20598 — 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-2022-20598 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