CVE-2025-26425VulnerabilityPublished 4 Sep 2025Updated 26 Feb 2026

CVE-2025-26425: Google Android · Elevation of privilege

Affects Google AndroidSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.0 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 08:11 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.0Medium

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

EPSS: 0.09% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 0% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:N/A:N

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: None
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: Low
Integrity: None
Availability: None

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

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable component 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 remotely (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., tricking a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without any interaction from any user.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: Low: There is some loss of confidentiality. Access to some restricted information is obtained, but the attacker does not have control over what information is obtained, or the amount or kind of loss is limited. The information disclosure does not cause a direct, serious loss to the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: None: There is no impact to availability within the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 4 Sep 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 2026-10-26.

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 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
Google Android	Affected =15 =14	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

1. Monitor for official patches from Google and apply them promptly once released to address the logic error in RoleService.java. 2. Restrict installation of untrusted or unknown applications on Android devices, especially those running versions 14 and 15, to reduce the risk of local exploitation. 3. Implement strong device access controls such as biometric or PIN authentication to limit physical access by unauthorized users. 4. Use Mobile Device Management (MDM) solutions to enforce application whitelisting and restrict permissions granted to apps. 5. Regularly audit installed applications and permissions to detect any suspicious or unauthorized privilege escalations. 6. Educate users about the risks of installing apps from unofficial sources and the importance of device security hygiene. 7. For high-security environments, consider additional endpoint protection solutions that monitor for abnormal privilege escalation attempts. 8. Maintain up-to-date backups and incident response plans to quickly recover from potential compromises stemming from privilege escalation.

Description

In multiple functions of RoleService.java, there is a possible permission squatting vulnerability due to a logic error in the code. This could lead to local escalation of privilege on versions of Android where android.permission.MANAGE_DEFAULT_APPLICATIONS was not defined with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2025-26425 is local elevation of privilege, which can lead to unauthorized access to sensitive data or system functions that are normally restricted. While the vulnerability does not directly affect system integrity or availability, the confidentiality of user data and system configurations could be compromised if an attacker gains elevated permissions. This could facilitate further attacks such as installing persistent malware, accessing private user information, or bypassing security controls. Organizations relying on Android devices for sensitive communications or operations may face increased risk of insider threats or attacks from malicious local applications. Since exploitation requires local access but no user interaction or prior privileges, the threat is more significant in environments where devices may be physically accessible by untrusted individuals or where malicious apps can be installed without strict controls. The lack of known exploits in the wild reduces immediate risk, but the vulnerability's presence in recent Android versions means it could be targeted in the future, especially as these versions gain wider adoption.

CWE-266Incorrect Privilege Assignment (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
A product incorrectly assigns a privilege to a particular actor, creating an unintended sphere of control for that actor.
Architecture and Design · Operation
Very carefully manage the setting, management, and handling of privileges. Explicitly manage trust zones in the software.
Architecture and Design · Operation · Environment Hardening
Run your code using the lowest privileges that are required to accomplish the necessary tasks. If possible, create isolated accounts with limited privileges that are only used for a single task. That way, a successful attack will not immediately give the attacker access to the rest of the software or its environment.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Docker Security (opens in a new tab)
Third Party Javascript Management (opens in a new tab)
Virtual Patching (opens in a new tab)
Secure Design Principles (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V1.4.4 (opens in a new tab)
V1.4.5 (opens in a new tab)
V1.10.1 (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 27 Feb 2026, 01:14 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-266

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats