CVE-2024-46921
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 and Modem Exynos 9820, 9825, 980, 990, 1080, 2100, 1280, 2200, 1330, 1380, 1480, 2400, 9110, W1000, Modem 5123, Modem 5300, Modem 5400. UE does not limit the number of attempts for the RRC Setup procedure in the 5G SA, leading to a denial of service (battery-drain attack).
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 vulnerability in Samsung mobile processors and modems (Exynos series and modem models 5123, 5300, 5400) allows attackers to repeatedly trigger RRC Setup procedures in 5G Standalone mode without any attempt limiting, causing excessive battery consumption and denial of service.
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
- Adjacent
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/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 device processor modelCheck the device Settings > About Phone > Processor information, or use a system info app to identify the exact Exynos processor variant (e.g., Exynos 1080, 1280, 1330, 1380, 1480, 2100, 2200, or 2400)Affected if If the processor is any of the listed Exynos models (1080, 1280, 1330, 1380, 1480, 2100, 2200, or 2400), the device contains a vulnerable processor
-
Confirm 5G Standalone mode is enabledNavigate to Settings > Mobile Networks > Network Mode or 5G Network Mode, and check if 5G Standalone (SA) or 5G SA/NSA mode is selected and activeAffected if If 5G Standalone mode is enabled and the device uses one of the affected Exynos processors, the vulnerability is exploitable
-
Check for abnormal battery consumptionMonitor battery usage statistics in Settings > Battery > Battery Usage, looking for unusually high consumption by the cellular radio or modem processes, particularly when the device is idle with 5G SA connectivityAffected if If battery drain is excessive and the device has an affected Exynos processor with 5G SA enabled, this may indicate active exploitation of this vulnerability
A device is affected if it contains any of the listed Exynos processors (1080, 1280, 1330, 1380, 1480, 2100, 2200, 2400) and has 5G Standalone mode enabled, as all firmware versions of these processors are vulnerable to the unconstrained RRC Setup procedure attack.
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-provided firmware updates from Samsung for affected processors and modems; monitor device battery behavior for abnormal drain as a symptom.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Testing2.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,408.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-46921 — 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-2024-46921 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