CVE-2024-29152
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, and Exynos Modem 5300. The baseband software does not properly check states specified by the RRC (Radio Resource Control) Reconfiguration message. 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 · moderate confidenceThis vulnerability exists in Samsung Exynos baseband firmware across multiple mobile processor, wearable processor, and modem models (980, 990, 1080, 2100, 2200, 1280, 1380, 1330, 2400, Modem 5123, Modem 5300). The baseband software fails to properly validate or check states specified within RRC (Radio Resource Control) Reconfiguration messages received from cell towers. Since RRC messages control radio resource management and connection states in LTE/5G networks, improper validation could allow a malicious or compromised cell tower to trigger the device into disclosing sensitive information.
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 chipset modelCheck the device specifications or use a system info app to determine the exact Exynos processor model (e.g., Exynos 980, 990, 850, 1080, 2100, 2200, 1280, 1380). This is typically listed in the device settings under 'About Phone' or 'Processor'.Affected if The device uses any of the affected Exynos models: 980, 990, 850, 1080, 2100, 2200, 1280, 1380, or related modem variants (1330, 2400, Modem 5123, Modem 5300).
-
Check the baseband firmware versionNavigate to Settings > About Phone > Software Information and look for the 'Baseband' or 'Modem' version field. Alternatively, use the AT command interface through a terminal app with root access to query the baseband version (e.g., AT+CGMR).Affected if The baseband firmware version matches an affected Exynos model and the device has not received a security patch addressing this specific CVE.
-
Verify the device model uses Exynos basebandConfirm whether the device uses Samsung's Exynos baseband/modem by checking the device's technical specifications from the manufacturer or using diagnostic apps that display modem information.Affected if The device employs an Exynos-based baseband processor from the affected product list.
-
Check the Android security patch levelGo to Settings > About Phone > Security Patch Level to see the date of the latest security update. Compare this against Samsung's security bulletin release date for the CVE-2024-29152 patch.Affected if The security patch level is older than the Samsung security update that addresses this baseband validation flaw.
A defender is affected if their device contains any of the listed Exynos chipsets (980, 990, 850, 1080, 2100, 2200, 1280, 1380, 1330, 2400, or modem variants 5123/5300) and is running baseband firmware without the CVE-2024-29152 patch, as indicated by an outdated security patch level.
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 dataThe primary remediation is obtaining and applying the Samsung security firmware update that addresses this baseband validation flaw. Organizations should inventory affected devices, apply vendor patches when available, and consider network access controls to limit exposure to untrusted cell towers while awaiting patches.
- Consultation8.0 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 $4,672.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-29152 — 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-2024-29152 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