CVE-2022-33210
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 · uneditedMemory corruption in automotive multimedia due to use of out-of-range pointer offset while parsing command request packet with a very large type value. in Snapdragon Auto
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 · high confidenceA memory corruption vulnerability exists in Snapdragon Auto's automotive multimedia component where parsing a command request packet with an excessively large type value causes an out-of-range pointer offset. This leads to memory corruption due to the code using the uncontrolled type value directly as a memory offset without proper bounds validation.
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 Qualcomm automotive chipset modelLocate the system information or BOM documentation that specifies the Qualcomm processor model (Apq8064au, Apq8096au, Msm8996au, Qam8295p, Qca6564a, Qca6564au, Qca6574a, or Qca6574au)Affected if The identified chipset matches any of the eight affected model numbers
-
Verify the automotive multimedia subsystem is activeCheck if the multimedia processing component is running or loaded on the automotive infotainment/head unit systemAffected if The multimedia component is enabled and processing command request packets
-
Inspect firmware version against affected rangeIf firmware access is available, retrieve the firmware build version for the multimedia component and confirm it falls under the affected product lineAffected if The firmware corresponds to any of the listed affected products (all versions are vulnerable)
-
Locate command request packet parsing codeSearch the multimedia firmware binary for the parsing routine that handles command request packets and processes the type fieldAffected if The parsing code uses the type value directly as a memory offset without visible bounds validation
-
Check for type field bounds validationExamine the packet parsing logic for validation checks that ensure the type value does not exceed valid array/table bounds before using it as an offsetAffected if No bounds checking is found on the type field before it is used as a pointer offset
The system is affected if it uses any of the eight listed Qualcomm automotive processors and the multimedia component that parses command request packets is active, since all firmware versions lack proper bounds validation on the type field used as a memory offset.
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 dataImplement robust bounds checking on the type field in command request packet parsing logic to ensure the computed pointer offset remains within valid memory boundaries before dereferencing.
- 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-2022-33210 — 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-2022-33210 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