VulnerabilityPublished 30 May 2025Updated 10 Jun 2025

CVE-2024-13915: Ulefone com.pri.factorytest · Improper Export of Android Application Components

Affects Ulefone com.pri.factorytestSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.9 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 15:59 UTC

CVSS 4.0 base score

6.9Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 9% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:N/VI:H/VA:N/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Attack Requirements: None
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None
Vulnerable system integrity: High
Vulnerable system availability: None
Subsequent system confidentiality: None
Subsequent system integrity: None
Subsequent system availability: None

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable system is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or through terminal emulation (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., using social engineering techniques to trick a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
Attack Complexity: Low: The attacker must take no measurable action to exploit the vulnerability. The attack requires no target-specific circumvention to exploit the vulnerability. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable system.
Attack Requirements: None: The successful attack does not depend on the deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system. The attacker can expect to be able to reach the vulnerability and execute the exploit under all or most instances of the vulnerability.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files of the vulnerable system to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Vulnerable System.
Vulnerable system integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the vulnerable system. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the vulnerable system.
Vulnerable system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the Subsequent System or all confidentiality impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the Subsequent System or all integrity impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.
Subsequent system availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the Subsequent System or all availability impact is constrained to the Vulnerable System.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 30 May 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Alpinecom.pri.factorytest`pkg:apk/com.pri.factorytest`Other threats	Affected =1.0	Fixed in–

Check your own hosts for these packages with threat-finder (opens in a new tab), our free open-source scanner.

AI-suggested

Organizations should first identify if any Ulefone or Krüger&Matz devices with the vulnerable "com.pri.factorytest" application are in use. Since no official patches are currently linked, mitigation should focus on limiting exposure. This includes restricting installation of untrusted applications via Mobile Device Management (MDM) solutions, enforcing application whitelisting, and disabling or uninstalling the vulnerable component if possible. Monitoring device logs for unusual factory reset triggers can help detect exploitation attempts. Users should be educated not to install apps from untrusted sources. For devices already deployed, consider isolating them from sensitive corporate resources or using containerization to separate corporate data from device-level resets. Vendors should be engaged to provide timely patches or firmware updates. Additionally, organizations should implement regular backups of mobile device data to minimize impact from forced resets. Network segmentation and endpoint detection can help reduce the risk of malicious app deployment. Finally, reviewing and tightening Android application export settings and permissions in custom device builds can prevent similar vulnerabilities.

Description

Android based smartphones from vendors such as Ulefone and Krüger&Matz contain "com.pri.factorytest" application preloaded onto devices during manufacturing process. The application "com.pri.factorytest" (version name: 1.0, version code: 1) exposes a ”com.pri.factorytest.emmc.FactoryResetService“ service allowing any application to perform a factory reset of the device. Application update did not increment the APK version. Instead, it was bundled in OS builds released later than December 2024 (Ulefone) and April 2025 (Krüger&Matz).

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a risk primarily to employees or users relying on affected Ulefone or Krüger&Matz devices. The factory reset capability can lead to loss of sensitive corporate data stored on the device, disruption of business operations, and potential downtime while devices are restored and reconfigured. Although the attack vector is local, meaning an attacker must have the ability to install or run an application on the device, the lack of required privileges or user interaction lowers the barrier for exploitation. This could be exploited by malicious insiders, or through social engineering to install a malicious app. The impact on confidentiality and availability is indirect but significant due to data loss and operational disruption. For organizations with Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) policies or those issuing these devices to staff, the risk is elevated. Additionally, the inability to detect the updated vulnerable app version easily may delay mitigation efforts. The vulnerability does not directly expose corporate networks but can serve as a stepping stone for further attacks if devices are reset and reconfigured improperly or if attackers use the disruption to mask other malicious activities.

CWE-926Improper Export of Android Application Components (opens in a new tab)
Variant weaknessOWASP Top 10 A08:2025: Software or Data Integrity Failures (opens in a new tab)
The Android application exports a component for use by other applications, but does not properly restrict which applications can launch the component or access the data it contains.
Build and Compilation · Attack Surface Reduction
If they do not need to be shared by other applications, explicitly mark components with android:exported="false" in the application manifest.
Build and Compilation · Attack Surface Reduction
If you only intend to use exported components between related apps under your control, use android:protectionLevel="signature" in the xml manifest to restrict access to applications signed by you.
Build and Compilation · Architecture and Design · Attack Surface Reduction
Limit Content Provider permissions (read/write) as appropriate.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Software Supply Chain Security (opens in a new tab)
Infrastructure as Code (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.8 (opens in a new tab)
V13.4.2 (opens in a new tab)
V7.2.2 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

cert.pl/en/posts/2025/05/CVE-2024-13915 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 8 Jul 2025, 16:00 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-926

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats