CVE-2024-47404
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 OpenHarmony v4.1.0 and prior versions allow a local attacker cause the common permission is upgraded to root and sensitive information leak through double free.
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 double-free vulnerability in OpenHarmony v4.1.0 and prior versions allows a local attacker to escalate common user permissions to root privileges and leak sensitive information through the memory corruption.
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 data>= 4.0, <= 4.1CVSS 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 OpenHarmony installation and versionCheck the system for OpenHarmony by examining system information files (e.g., /etc/os-release, version files in /system or /vendor), or use commands like 'getprop' on Android-based builds, 'cat /proc/version', or check boot messages for OpenHarmony version stringsAffected if The installed version matches 4.0.x or 4.1.x (within the >= 4.0, <= 4.1 range)
-
Verify the permission handling component is presentInspect the system's permission management binaries or services - look for permission-related daemons, SELinux/AppArmor managers, or account management services that handle user privilege escalationAffected if The permission handling component exists and is the stock version shipped with the affected OpenHarmony releases
-
Check for double-free indicators in permission service logsReview system logs (dmesg, logcat, or /var/log messages) for memory corruption errors, double-free corruption warnings, or unexpected crashes in permission-related processesAffected if Logs show frequent crashes, memory corruption, or heap errors in permission handling processes
-
Confirm user privilege boundary is accessibleTest the local privilege escalation path by checking if unprivileged users can trigger permission management operations that involve memory allocation/deallocation cyclesAffected if The permission handling component processes requests from non-root users without additional integrity checks
A user is affected if their OpenHarmony installation is version 4.0.x or 4.1.x and includes the vulnerable permission handling component in its default configuration.
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 dataUpgrade OpenHarmony to a version beyond v4.1.0 that contains the fix, or apply vendor-provided security patches addressing the double-free vulnerability in the permission handling component.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing5.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,752.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-47404 — 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-2024-47404 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