CVE-2024-47040
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 · uneditedThere is a possible UAF due to a logic error in the code. 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 Use-After-Free (UAF) vulnerability exists due to a logic error in the code, allowing a local attacker to escalate privileges to a higher level without requiring any user interaction or additional execution privileges.
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 Android version and security patch levelRun 'getprop ro.build.version.release' and 'getprop ro.build.version.security_patch' to retrieve the OS version and installed security patchesAffected if The device runs any version of Android and has not applied the specific patch for CVE-2024-47040
-
Check for vulnerable system servicesUse 'ps -A' to list running processes and identify services with elevated privileges running on the deviceAffected if Privileged system services that contain the UAF logic error are active on the device
-
Verify kernel memory management settingsInspect /proc/sys/kernel messages and dmesg logs for any memory corruption indicators or UAF-related kernel warnings using 'dmesg | grep -i "use after free" or "uaf"'Affected if Kernel logs show any UAF-related memory corruption events matching the vulnerable code path
-
Review SELinux and system permissionsCheck SELinux status with 'getenforce' and review system service configurations in /system/etc/init or /vendor/etc/init for privileged servicesAffected if SELinux is set to permissive or a vulnerable privileged service is running with exploitable permissions
-
Detect privilege escalation indicatorsMonitor for unexpected process creation or privilege changes using 'adb shell ps -eo pid,user,comm,pri' and compare against known system service baselinesAffected if Unusual child processes are spawned from privileged services indicating exploitation
A device is affected if it runs any version of Google Android and executes the vulnerable privileged service or kernel component containing the logic error that causes the dangling pointer leading to UAF.
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 dataIdentify and fix the logic error causing the dangling pointer in the affected code, ensuring proper memory lifecycle management and cleanup to prevent UAF conditions.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 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 $7,808.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-47040 — 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-2024-47040 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