CVE-2017-15841 in Snapdragon Mobile
Summary
by MITRE
When HOST sends a Special command ID packet, Controller triggers a RAM Dump and FW reset in Snapdragon Mobile in version SD 410/12, SD 425, SD 427, SD 430, SD 435, SD 450, SD 615/16/SD 415, SD 625, SD 650/52, SD 820, SD 835, Snapdragon_High_Med_2016.
If you want to get best quality of vulnerability data, you may have to visit VulDB.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 06/07/2020
This vulnerability exists in Qualcomm Snapdragon mobile chipsets where a specially crafted Special command ID packet sent by a Host device can trigger an unintended system state. The flaw manifests when the Controller component receives this specific packet type, causing it to initiate a RAM dump followed by a firmware reset operation. This behavior represents a critical security weakness that can be exploited to disrupt normal device operation and potentially gain unauthorized access to sensitive system information.
The technical implementation of this vulnerability involves the communication protocol handling within the Snapdragon chipset's controller subsystem. When processing the Special command ID packet, the system fails to properly validate or sanitize the incoming data before executing the associated operations. This lack of input validation creates an attack surface where malicious actors can manipulate the normal communication flow to trigger unintended system behavior. The vulnerability affects multiple generations of Snapdragon chipsets including the SD 410/12, SD 425, SD 427, SD 430, SD 435, SD 450, SD 615/16/SD 415, SD 625, SD 650/52, SD 820, and SD 835 models, indicating a widespread issue across Qualcomm's mobile platform portfolio.
From an operational perspective, this vulnerability presents significant risks to device security and availability. The RAM dump operation can expose sensitive information stored in memory, including cryptographic keys, authentication credentials, and application data that may be accessible to an attacker. The subsequent firmware reset can cause temporary service disruption and potentially create opportunities for further exploitation. The attack vector is particularly concerning because it can be executed through standard communication protocols without requiring physical access or elevated privileges, making it accessible to remote attackers. This vulnerability aligns with CWE-20, which addresses improper input validation, and represents a classic case of command injection or protocol manipulation.
The security implications extend beyond simple disruption to potentially enable more sophisticated attacks. The RAM dump capability could provide attackers with access to sensitive runtime information that might reveal system architecture, memory layouts, or implementation details that could be leveraged for additional exploits. The firmware reset operation could be used to create a window of opportunity for installing malicious firmware or to disrupt legitimate device operations. This vulnerability also maps to ATT&CK technique T1059, which covers command and scripting interpreter, as it involves the execution of commands through protocol manipulation. Organizations should consider implementing network-level monitoring to detect unusual command sequences and establish firmware update procedures to address this issue across affected devices.
Mitigation strategies should focus on both immediate protective measures and long-term architectural improvements. Device manufacturers should implement robust input validation mechanisms to prevent unauthorized command execution, particularly for special command ID packets. Network segmentation and access controls can limit the attack surface by restricting which devices can communicate with vulnerable systems. Firmware updates should be prioritized to address the underlying validation flaws in the controller subsystem. Additionally, system administrators should monitor for anomalous communication patterns that might indicate exploitation attempts. The vulnerability demonstrates the importance of secure protocol implementation and proper input sanitization in embedded systems, particularly those handling sensitive operations like memory management and firmware control. Regular security assessments of communication protocols and system interfaces should be conducted to identify similar validation weaknesses that could be exploited in similar fashion.