dbcve.org
Improper Certificate ValidationWeakness · CWE-295

CVE-2026-22093

CRITICAL · 9.5 CVSS v4.0 Published 2026-07-13
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
100/100
Remediation priority · Urgent
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click 5 weeks old

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 · unedited
The EVbee Service Android app uses TLS encrypted communication (HTTPS), but does not validate the certificate provided by the server. This allows an attacker on the network path between the app and EVbee server to intercept and manipulate the communication between the app and server. The traffic is weakly encrypted using RC4 with a hardcoded key, which allows an attacker to gain access to the communication. Part of this communication involves access codes to charging stations. This issue affects EVbee Service: v1.4.101.00.

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 confidence

The EVbee Service Android app (v1.4.101.00) fails to validate server certificates during HTTPS communication, enabling man-in-the-middle attacks. Additionally, the app uses the insecure RC4 cipher with a hardcoded key to encrypt traffic, allowing attackers to decrypt and manipulate communications including charging station access codes.

MitigationReplace the hardcoded RC4 encryption with modern cipher suites (e.g., AES-256-GCM) and implement certificate pinning or proper TLS certificate validation to prevent MITM attacks.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

CVSS 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
Network
Complexity
Low
Privileges
None
Authentication
X
User interaction
None
Scope
X

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:P/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:N/SC:H/SI:H/SA:L/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X

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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify if EVbee Service app is present
    On Android devices, check installed applications list for 'EVbee Service' or 'EVbee' - use adb command: adb shell pm list packages | grep -i evbee, or check device Settings > Apps
    Affected if The EVbee Service Android app is installed on any device in the environment
  2. Verify installed app version
    Run: adb shell dumpsys package com.evbee.service (or package name if different) to display versionName and versionCode; alternatively check in Settings > Apps > EVbee Service > Version
    Affected if The installed version matches v1.4.101.00 or falls within any broader affected version range if discovered
  3. Inspect network traffic for certificate validation failure
    Configure a proxy (e.g., Burp Suite, OWASP ZAP) between the Android device and network; attempt to intercept HTTPS traffic from the app. If the app connects successfully without certificate validation failure, this confirms the vulnerability
    Affected if The app successfully establishes HTTPS connections through an intercepting proxy without any certificate validation error
  4. Detect RC4 cipher usage in traffic
    Use a network sniffer (e.g., Wireshark, tcpdump) to capture traffic to/from the EVbee backend; analyze the cipher suite being used. Check for RC4-based cipher suites in the TLS handshake or look for non-TLS encrypted traffic patterns
    Affected if Network traffic shows RC4 cipher usage or unencrypted communication where TLS with proper ciphers is expected

A defender is affected if the EVbee Service Android app (specifically version 1.4.101.00) is installed and the device can be intercepted via a proxy without certificate errors, indicating missing certificate validation.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Replace the hardcoded RC4 encryption with modern cipher suites (e.g., AES-256-GCM) and implement certificate pinning or proper TLS certificate validation to prevent MITM attacks.

Have this fixed Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation6.0 h
  • Implementation32.0 h
  • Testing12.0 h
  • Review / QA6.0 h
56.0 hours of engineering $9,840
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $15,744.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-22093 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2026-22093 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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