CVE-2024-27368
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 · uneditedAn issue was discovered in Samsung Mobile Processor Exynos Mobile Processor, Wearable Processor Exynos 980, Exynos 850, Exynos 1080, Exynos 1280, Exynos 1380, Exynos 1330, Exynos 1480, Exynos W920, Exynos W930. In the function slsi_rx_received_frame_ind(), there is no input validation check on a length coming from userspace, which can lead to a potential heap over-read.
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 · high confidenceA missing input validation vulnerability in the Samsung Exynos driver function slsi_rx_received_frame_ind() allows a malicious userspace application to supply an arbitrary length value without bounds checking. This causes the kernel to read beyond the allocated heap buffer, potentially exposing sensitive kernel memory contents to userland.
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 versionsall 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
- 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 the Exynos chip model in the deviceCheck device hardware specifications, boot logs, or system information to determine which Exynos processor is present. Common methods include: 'cat /proc/cpuinfo' on Android devices, checking 'lspci' or 'lsusb' output, reviewing the device's technical specifications from manufacturer documentation, or examining boot-up kernel messages via 'dmesg'Affected if The device uses any of these Exynos models: 980, 850, 1080, 1280, 1380, 1330, 1480, or W920
-
Locate the slsi driver or firmware componentsSearch for Samsung LSI (slsi) driver files in the kernel or firmware directories. Common paths may include /lib/firmware/, /system/lib/, or kernel driver directories. Look for files containing 'slsi', 'wlan', 'wifi', or 'r4' in the firmware directoryAffected if The slsi_rx_received_frame_ind() function exists in the loaded driver or firmware, indicating the vulnerable code path is present
-
Verify userspace can interact with the WiFi driver interfaceCheck if the WiFi subsystem is active and has userspace interfaces available. This may involve checking for WiFi being enabled, examining network interfaces (iw list, ip link show), or verifying the wlan driver is loadedAffected if WiFi is enabled and the Samsung slsi WiFi driver is active, allowing userspace applications to invoke the vulnerable slsi_rx_received_frame_ind() function
-
Confirm firmware version (if determinable)Read the firmware version from the Exynos WiFi firmware files or driver debug interfaces. Check /sys/class/net/wlan*/firmware_version, or read firmware file metadata, or use 'strings' on firmware binaries to find version stringsAffected if The device runs any firmware version on the affected Exynos chips listed (all versions are affected per the advisory)
If the device contains any of the affected Exynos chips (980, 850, 1080, 1280, 1380, 1330, 1480, W920) and has the slsi WiFi driver active, the device is vulnerable to kernel memory exposure via the unchecked length parameter in slsi_rx_received_frame_ind().
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 dataSamsung should implement proper input validation on the userspace-supplied length parameter in slsi_rx_received_frame_ind() to ensure it does not exceed the allocated buffer size before use. Users should apply vendor-provided firmware/security updates for affected Exynos devices.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing12.0 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 $7,616.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-27368 — 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-2024-27368 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