CVE-2024-44094
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 ppmp_protect_mfcfw_buf of code/drm_fw.c, there is a possible memory corruption due to improper input validation. This could lead to local escalation of privilege 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 confidenceA memory corruption vulnerability exists in the ppmp_protect_mfcfw_buf function in code/drm_fw.c due to improper input validation. This allows a local attacker to achieve privilege escalation without requiring any additional execution privileges or user interaction.
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
- 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 Android distributionCheck if the device runs Google Android by examining the system properties (e.g., run 'getprop ro.build.fingerprint' or check Settings > About Phone > Build Number)Affected if The device is running a Google Android-based OS (vs. other Android forks like Amazon FireOS, custom ROMs)
-
Check the security patch levelRun 'getprop ro.build.version.security_patch' or check Settings > About Phone > Android security patch levelAffected if The security patch level is earlier than the month the CVE-2024-44094 fix was released (typically September 2024 or later)
-
Verify the DRM firmware module existsSearch for the drm_fw.c or related DRM firmware files in /vendor or /system partitions (e.g., 'find /vendor -name *drm*' or check for ppmp_protect_mfcfw_buf references in firmware binaries)Affected if The DRM firmware module containing the ppmp_protect_mfcfw_buf function is present on the device
-
Check for the vulnerable function in firmwareDisassemble or inspect the DRM firmware binary for the ppmp_protect_mfcfw_buf function and verify if proper input validation bounds checks are presentAffected if The function lacks proper input validation bounds checks before memory operations
A Google Android device is affected if its security patch level predates the CVE fix and the vulnerable DRM firmware code is present with missing input validation in the ppmp_protect_mfcfw_buf function.
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-provided security patch for CVE-2024-44094 which adds proper input validation to the ppmp_protect_mfcfw_buf function in the affected DRM firmware code.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing8.0 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 $6,656.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-44094 — 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-2024-44094 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