CVE-2022-38117
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 · uneditedJuiker app hard-coded its AES key in the source code. A physical attacker, after getting the Android root privilege, can use the AES key to decrypt users’ ciphertext and tamper with it.
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 confidenceThe Juiker Android application hard-coded its AES encryption key directly in the source code. A physical attacker who obtains Android root privileges can extract this key from the device and use it to decrypt stored user ciphertext and modify the decrypted data.
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 data= 4.6.0311.1CVSS 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
- Physical
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
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 if Juiker app is installedOn the Android device, go to Settings > Apps > find 'Juiker' or ' Juiker Juiker' in the application list. Alternatively, run: `adb shell pm list packages | grep juiker`Affected if Juiker application is not found on the device - not affected
-
Verify the installed Juiker versionIn Settings > Apps > Juiker > App info, check the 'Version' or 'Version name' field. Alternatively, run: `adb shell dumpsys package com.juiker | grep versionName`Affected if Version displayed is exactly 4.6.0311.1 - this version is affected by the hardcoded AES key vulnerability
-
Confirm the app stores local encrypted dataCheck if the app has internal storage containing encrypted files. Run: `adb shell run-as com.juiker ls -la /data/data/com.juiker/files/` or use a file manager to explore /data/data/com.juiker/Affected if Encrypted or ciphertext files exist in the app's private storage - these could be decrypted using the extracted hardcoded key
-
Check device root statusThe attack requires root privileges on the device. Check if the device is rooted by running: `adb shell su -c id` or using a root checker appAffected if Device has root access - an attacker with physical access could exploit this vulnerability to extract the key and decrypt stored data
A user is affected if Juiker version 4.6.0311.1 is installed on a rooted device and the app stores encrypted local data, since the hardcoded AES key could be extracted and used to decrypt that data.
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 dataRemove the hard-coded AES key and implement proper cryptographic key management using Android Keystore or derived keys from user credentials, along with migrating existing encrypted data to the new key management scheme.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,040.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-38117 — 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-2022-38117 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