CVE-2024-20043
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 da, 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 is not needed for exploitation. Patch ID: ALPS08541781; Issue ID: ALPS08541781.
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 confidenceA missing bounds check in a system daemon (referred to as 'da') allows an out-of-bounds write vulnerability, enabling local privilege escalation from System privileges. The vulnerability is exploitable without user interaction and affects MediaTek/ALPS-based components.
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= 12.0= 13.0= 14.0CVSS 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
- Network
- Complexity
- High
- Privileges
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/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.
-
Verify Android versionGo to Settings > About Phone > Android version or run 'getprop ro.build.version.sdk' via ADBAffected if Version is 12.0, 13.0, or 14.0 (exact matches as listed in affected versions)
-
Confirm MediaTek chipset presenceRun 'getprop ro.hardware' or 'getprop ro.chipname' via ADB, or check device specs for MediaTek processorAffected if Device uses a MediaTek/ALPS-based chipset (the vulnerability affects MediaTek/ALPS components)
-
Identify the vulnerable daemonSearch for a system daemon named 'da' in /system/bin/, /vendor/bin/, or /sbin/ using 'find /system -name "*da*"' or 'ls -la /system/bin/da*' via ADBAffected if A system daemon binary named 'da' exists and runs with elevated (System) privileges
-
Check daemon process and privilegesRun 'ps -A | grep da' via ADB to list running processes containing 'da', then check process privileges with 'cat /proc/<pid>/status'Affected if A daemon named 'da' runs with System user/group privileges (uid 1000)
The environment is affected if the Android version is exactly 12.0, 13.0, or 14.0 AND the device uses a MediaTek chipset with a privileged 'da' daemon present.
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 ALPS08541781 which adds proper bounds checking to prevent the out-of-bounds write. If patch unavailable, identify and harden the vulnerable daemon code with input validation and buffer size checks.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing10.0 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 $8,928.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-20043 — 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-2024-20043 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