CVE-2023-32840
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 modem CCCI, 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 may be also needed for exploitation Patch ID: MOLY01138425; Issue ID: MOLY01138425 (MSV-862).
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 confidenceOut-of-bounds write vulnerability in modem CCCI (Common Channel Control Interface) due to a missing bounds check. This could allow a local attacker to escalate privileges to System execution level. User interaction may be required for exploitation.
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 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
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/UI:R/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 Mediatek modem chipset modelQuery the device for modem information using AT commands (e.g., 'AT+CGMM' or 'AT+CGMR') or check system logs (/var/log/messages, dmesg) for modem identification strings like 'Lr12a', 'Nr15', 'Nr16', or 'Nr17'Affected if The modem model matches one of the affected chipsets: Lr12a, Nr15, Nr16, or Nr17
-
Verify the CCCI interface is accessibleConfirm the device exposes the Common Channel Control Interface (CCCI) - this is typically visible in /dev/ttyAC* or /dev/ccci_* device nodes, or accessible via AT command portsAffected if CCCI interface nodes exist and are accessible on the device
-
Check modem firmware versionRetrieve the modem firmware version using vendor-specific AT commands (e.g., 'AT+MVER' or similar) or by reading the modem partition from /proc or /sys filesystem entries under /sys/class/modem/Affected if The modem firmware version is earlier than the patched version MOLY01138425, or if the version cannot be determined (indicating unpatched firmware)
-
Confirm local attack surfaceVerify whether applications or processes can interact with the CCCI interface locally - check permissions on /dev/ccci_* or ttyAC* device nodes and whether untrusted local apps can access modem interfacesAffected if Local processes without elevated privileges can send commands to the CCCI interface
A device is affected if it contains a Mediatek Lr12a, Nr15, Nr16, or Nr17 modem chipset running firmware older than MOLY01138425, with the CCCI interface accessible to local processes.
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 vendor patch MOLY01138425 via firmware update. Verify device fleet patch status and test for regressions after update deployment.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 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 $6,656.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-32840 — 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-2023-32840 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