CVE-2024-53838
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 Exynos_parsing_user_data_registered_itu_t_t35 of VendorVideoAPI.cpp, there is a possible out of bounds write due to an incorrect bounds check. 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 bounds check error in Exynos_parsing_user_data_registered_itu_t_t35 in VendorVideoAPI.cpp allows an out-of-bounds write during T.35 user data parsing in the Exynos video processor. This memory corruption can be leveraged for local privilege escalation without requiring 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 the SoC processorCheck /proc/cpuinfo or use a system info app to determine if the device uses an Exynos chipset. The vulnerable code is in the Exynos video processor.Affected if The device does NOT use an Exynos processor - this vulnerability only affects Exynos-based devices
-
Verify video processing component presenceConfirm the VendorVideoAPI component exists on the system. This is typically a vendor-specific video processing library included with Exynos-based Android devices.Affected if The VendorVideoAPI component is not present on the device - the vulnerability only exists where this component exists
-
Check if video capture functionality is accessibleVerify whether video capture/video recording capabilities are available and can be accessed by applications on the device.Affected if Video capture functionality is fully disabled and inaccessible - the vulnerability requires this feature to be reachable for exploitation (though exploitation is local and does not require user interaction)
The device is affected if it uses an Exynos processor and has the VendorVideoAPI video processing component present, regardless of Android version since all versions are impacted.
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.
dbcve · scopedApply vendor patch for CVE-2024-53838 to address the incorrect bounds check in the VendorVideoAPI.cpp T.35 parsing routine. Until patch is available, consider restricting access to video capture functionality.
- Check the Android Security Bulletin for the month this CVE was addressed (refer to source.android.com/security/bulletin)
- Apply the latest Android security update available for your device
- If using an Exynos-based device, check for vendor-specific (e.g., Samsung) firmware updates that include this patch
- Verify the patch is applied by checking Settings > About Phone > Security Patch Level
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $3,328.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-53838 — 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-2024-53838 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