CVE-2023-35663
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 Init of protocolnetadapter.cpp, there is a possible out of bounds read due to a missing bounds check. This could lead to remote information disclosure with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.
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 out-of-bounds read vulnerability exists in the Init function of protocolnetadapter.cpp due to a missing bounds check. An attacker can exploit this to read sensitive information from memory without requiring any special privileges or user interaction.
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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/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.
-
Confirm the system is running Google AndroidCheck /system/build.prop for the 'ro.product.model' and 'ro.build.version.release' properties, or run 'getprop ro.product.model' and 'getprop ro.build.version.release' via ADBAffected if The system is Google Android (the vulnerability affects all Android versions)
-
Identify the Android framework network componentsSearch for files named protocolnetadapter.cpp or libraries containing 'protocolnetadapter' in the system partition (e.g., find /system -name '*protocolnetadapter*' 2>/dev/null)Affected if The vulnerable code exists in the system's network adapter implementation (present in all Android versions)
-
Check for the Init function in network adapter codeExamine any located protocolnetadapter files for the Init function implementation and verify if bounds checking is present on array indicesAffected if The Init function lacks proper array index validation before memory access (the specific vulnerability condition)
-
Review network adapter memory access patternsAnalyze network adapter initialization code for buffer read operations that do not include length/bounds validation before array accessAffected if Memory reads occur without prior bounds validation on array indices (exploitable condition present)
If the system is running Google Android, it is affected by this vulnerability since all Android versions contain the vulnerable protocolnetadapter.cpp component with the unchecked bounds in the Init function.
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 proper bounds checking in the Init function of protocolnetadapter.cpp to validate array indices before accessing memory. Ensure all buffer accesses include appropriate length validation.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation3.0 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 $4,448.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-35663 — 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-2023-35663 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