CVE-2024-27232
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 asn1_ec_pkey_parse of asn1_common.c, there is a possible OOB read due to a missing null check. This could lead to local 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 confidenceIn the asn1_ec_pkey_parse function in asn1_common.c, an out-of-bounds read vulnerability exists due to a missing null pointer check. When parsing EC (Elliptic Curve) public key structures from ASN.1 data, the code fails to validate a pointer before dereferencing it, allowing a specially crafted input to trigger the OOB read and leak sensitive information from memory.
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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/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.
-
Identify Android version and security patch levelGo to Settings > About Phone > Android version and Build number, or run 'getprop ro.build.version.release' and 'getprop ro.build.version.security_patch' via adb shellAffected if The device runs any version of Android, as all versions are affected according to the provided information
-
Check for presence of asn1_common.c in systemSearch for the file asn1_common.c in the system partition using 'find /system -name asn1_common.c 2>/dev/null' or 'find /vendor -name asn1_common.c 2>/dev/null' via adb shellAffected if The file exists on the device, indicating the vulnerable code component is present
-
Verify EC key parsing functionality is in useCheck if applications or services that parse ASN.1 encoded EC keys are running. This could include checking for apps using cryptographic operations with EC keys, or examining logcat output for ASN.1 parsing activityAffected if The device processes ASN.1 encoded EC public keys, which triggers the vulnerable code path in asn1_ec_pkey_parse
-
Inspect SELinux or security policies for ASN.1 parser accessRun 'getenforce' and check if a tee or trusted execution environment is loading ASN.1 related libraries via 'ls -la /vendor/lib/*asn1*' or 'ls -la /system/lib/*asn1*'Affected if The ASN.1 parsing libraries are accessible and loaded on the device
The environment is affected if the device runs any version of Android and contains the asn1_common.c component that performs EC public key parsing from ASN.1 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 dataApply the vendor-supplied patch which adds the missing null check before pointer dereference in asn1_ec_pkey_parse. If no patch is available, add explicit null validation for the pointer in question before use.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,392.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-27232 — 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-2024-27232 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