CVE-2024-28818
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, Wearable Processor, and Modem Exynos 980, Exynos 990, Exynos 1080, Exynos 2100, Exynos 2200, Exynos 1280, Exynos 1380, Exynos 1330, Exynos 2400, Exynos Modem 5123, Exynos Modem 5300. The baseband software does not properly check states specified by the RRC (Radio Resource Control) module. This can lead to disclosure of sensitive information.
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 baseband firmware vulnerability in Samsung Exynos processors (980, 990, 1080, 2100, 2200, 1280, 1380, 1330, 2400) and modems (5123, 5300) allows improper RRC state checking, potentially exposing sensitive cellular network communication data. The flaw resides in the radio protocol stack software running on the baseband processor, which handles cellular connectivity independently from the main application processor.
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
- 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.
-
Identify the device processor modelCheck the device Settings > About Phone > SoC/Processor information, or use a system info app to identify the chipset (Exynos 980, 990, 1080, 2100, 2200, 1280, 1380, or 1330)Affected if The device uses any of the listed Exynos processors (980, 990, 1080, 2100, 2200, 1280, 1380, 1330)
-
Identify the baseband/modem firmware versionCheck Settings > About Phone > Baseband version or use *#0011# (service menu on some Samsung devices) to view modem firmware informationAffected if A baseband firmware version is present on a device with one of the affected Exynos processors (all versions are vulnerable)
-
Confirm device uses Exynos 2400 or later modemVerify if the device uses Exynos 2400 processor or Exynos 5300/5123 modem variants (these may have different patch status)Affected if The device uses an older Exynos variant (980, 990, 1080, 2100, 2200, 1280, 1380, 1330) rather than the newer 2400 processor
If the device contains any of the affected Exynos processors (980, 990, 1080, 2100, 2200, 1280, 1380, 1330) or modems (5123, 5300), it is affected since all firmware versions for these models contain the vulnerability.
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-supplied security firmware updates from Samsung; contact device manufacturers for patch availability if not automatically delivered. Until patched, assume sensitive cellular communications may be at risk.
- Consultation8.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing16.0 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 $8,704.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-28818 — 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-2024-28818 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