CVE-2023-32828
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 vpu, there is a possible out of bounds write due to an integer overflow. This could lead to local escalation of privilege with System execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation. Patch ID: ALPS07767817; Issue ID: ALPS07767817.
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 confidenceInteger overflow in the VPU (Video Processing Unit) driver allows an attacker with System-level privileges to trigger an out-of-bounds write, potentially leading to local privilege escalation. The vulnerability stems from insufficient bounds checking when handling video processing parameters, where arithmetic operations overflow buffer size calculations.
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= 23.0= 12.0CVSS 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 system versionDetermine if the system is running Mediatek IoT Yocto 23.0 or Google Android 12.0. On Android, check /system/build.prop for the ro.build.version.release value. On IoT Yocto, check the OS release version (cat /etc/os-release or uname -a)Affected if System version matches Mediatek IoT Yocto 23.0 or Android 12.0 exactly
-
Verify VPU driver is presentCheck if the VPU (Video Processing Unit) driver is loaded or present on the system. On Android, examine /proc/modules or lsmod for VPU-related kernel modules. On Linux, check lsmod or /proc/modules for video processing driver modulesAffected if VPU driver module is loaded and active on the system
-
Check if driver handles video parametersExamine system logs, driver configuration, or /proc filesystem entries to determine if the VPU driver is actively processing video parameters or handling video buffer allocations. This may involve checking if any video applications or services are utilizing the VPUAffected if VPU driver is enabled and actively processing video parameters that could trigger the vulnerable buffer size calculation code path
A system is affected if it runs Mediatek IoT Yocto 23.0 or Android 12.0, has the VPU driver loaded and active, and the patch ALPS07767817 has not been applied to add overflow checks in the VPU driver's parameter handling code.
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 patch ALPS07767817 to the VPU driver, which adds proper integer overflow checks before buffer allocation. Verify the patch is integrated into the device's kernel/driver build and deploy via system update.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing5.0 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 $4,752.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-32828 — 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-2023-32828 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