CVE-2024-27383
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 980, Exynos 850, Exynos 1280, Exynos 1380, and Exynos 1330. In the function slsi_get_scan_extra_ies(), there is no input validation check on default_ies coming from userspace, which can lead to a heap overwrite.
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 `slsi_get_scan_extra_ies()` function of Samsung Exynos mobile processors (980, 850, 1280, 1380, 1330) allows unvalidated `default_ies` data from userspace to be processed without bounds checking, leading to heap memory overwrite. This is a local privilege escalation or memory corruption flaw in the Wi-Fi/Firmware driver stack.
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
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/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.
-
Identify the Exynos processor modelCheck system information or device specifications to determine if the device uses an affected Exynos processor (980, 850, 1080, 1280, 1330, 1380, 1480, or W920)Affected if The device uses any of the listed Exynos processor models
-
Check Wi-Fi firmware versionQuery the Wi-Fi driver or firmware subsystem for the current firmware version using system utilities (such as /sys/class/wlan or Wi-Fi driver diagnostic tools)Affected if The firmware version matches one of the affected models and the version is not patched (firmware is 'all versions' meaning unpatched)
-
Verify the slsi_get_scan_extra_ies function presenceInspect the Wi-Fi driver binary or firmware image for the presence of the slsi_get_scan_extra_ies() function and its handling of default_ies parameterAffected if The vulnerable function exists and processes default_ies without bounds checking
-
Check for Wi-Fi scan functionalityConfirm that Wi-Fi scanning is enabled and the device has the capability to process scan request parameters from userspaceAffected if Wi-Fi scanning is active and userspace can supply ies data to the driver
The device is affected if it runs on any of the listed Exynos processors (980, 850, 1080, 1280, 1330, 1380, 1480, W920) with unpatched firmware that contains the slsi_get_scan_extra_ies() function vulnerable to unbounded default_ies processing.
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 must release firmware patches for affected processors adding proper length validation and bounds checking on `default_ies` before use; end users should apply processor/firmware security updates from device manufacturers as they become available.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA6.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,192.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-27383 — 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-2024-27383 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