A remote code execution vulnerability in the Qualcomm crypto driver in Android before 2016-11-05 could enable a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code within the context of the kernel. This issue is rated as Critical due to the possibility of remote code execution in the context of the kernel. Android ID: A-30515053. References: Qualcomm QC-CR#1050970.
The product does not restrict or incorrectly restricts access to a resource from an unauthorized actor.
Name | Vendor | Start Version | End Version |
---|---|---|---|
Android | * | 7.0 (including) | |
Linux-armadaxp | Ubuntu | precise | * |
Linux-flo | Ubuntu | esm-apps/xenial | * |
Linux-flo | Ubuntu | trusty | * |
Linux-flo | Ubuntu | vivid/stable-phone-overlay | * |
Linux-flo | Ubuntu | xenial | * |
Linux-flo | Ubuntu | yakkety | * |
Linux-goldfish | Ubuntu | trusty | * |
Linux-grouper | Ubuntu | trusty | * |
Linux-linaro-omap | Ubuntu | precise | * |
Linux-linaro-shared | Ubuntu | precise | * |
Linux-linaro-vexpress | Ubuntu | precise | * |
Linux-lts-quantal | Ubuntu | precise | * |
Linux-lts-quantal | Ubuntu | precise/esm | * |
Linux-lts-raring | Ubuntu | precise | * |
Linux-lts-raring | Ubuntu | precise/esm | * |
Linux-lts-saucy | Ubuntu | precise | * |
Linux-lts-saucy | Ubuntu | precise/esm | * |
Linux-lts-utopic | Ubuntu | trusty | * |
Linux-lts-wily | Ubuntu | trusty | * |
Linux-maguro | Ubuntu | trusty | * |
Linux-mako | Ubuntu | esm-apps/xenial | * |
Linux-mako | Ubuntu | trusty | * |
Linux-mako | Ubuntu | vivid/stable-phone-overlay | * |
Linux-mako | Ubuntu | xenial | * |
Linux-mako | Ubuntu | yakkety | * |
Linux-manta | Ubuntu | trusty | * |
Linux-qcm-msm | Ubuntu | precise | * |
Linux-raspi2 | Ubuntu | vivid/ubuntu-core | * |
Linux-ti-omap4 | Ubuntu | precise | * |
Access control involves the use of several protection mechanisms such as:
When any mechanism is not applied or otherwise fails, attackers can compromise the security of the product by gaining privileges, reading sensitive information, executing commands, evading detection, etc. There are two distinct behaviors that can introduce access control weaknesses: