CVE-2025-26428VulnerabilityPublished 4 Sep 2025

CVE-2025-26428: Google Android · Elevation of privilege

Affects Google AndroidSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 3.2 Low.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

3.2Low

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 1% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.

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

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

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

Attack Vector: Physical: The attack requires the attacker to physically touch or manipulate the vulnerable component. Physical interaction may be brief or persistent.
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: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
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: Low: Modification of data is possible, but the attacker does not have control over the consequence of a modification, or the amount of modification is limited. The data modification does not have a direct, serious impact on 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 =13	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

European organizations should prioritize the following mitigation steps: 1) Ensure all Android devices are updated to the latest available versions once Google releases patches addressing CVE-2025-26428. 2) Implement strict physical security controls to prevent unauthorized access to devices, including secure storage and policies for lost or stolen devices. 3) Educate users about the risks of social engineering and the importance of not interacting with suspicious prompts or requests that could trigger the vulnerability. 4) Employ mobile device management (MDM) solutions to enforce strong lock screen policies, remote wipe capabilities, and monitoring for unusual device behavior. 5) Consider additional authentication mechanisms such as biometric locks or multi-factor authentication to reduce reliance on the vulnerable lock screen logic. 6) For high-risk environments, restrict the use of affected Android versions or devices until patches are available. 7) Regularly audit device compliance and user adherence to security policies to detect and respond to potential exploitation attempts promptly.

Description

In startLockTaskMode of LockTaskController.java, there is a possible lock screen bypass due to a logic error in the code. This could lead to physical escalation of privilege with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is needed for exploitation.

Impact

For European organizations, the impact of this vulnerability depends largely on the use of affected Android versions within their mobile device fleets. Since the vulnerability allows a lock screen bypass with physical access and user interaction, it poses a risk primarily in scenarios where devices are lost, stolen, or temporarily accessible to unauthorized individuals. Confidentiality and integrity of data on affected devices could be compromised, potentially exposing sensitive corporate information or enabling unauthorized actions. The low CVSS score and requirement for user interaction reduce the likelihood of widespread automated exploitation; however, targeted attacks or social engineering could still be effective. This is particularly relevant for sectors with high security requirements such as finance, government, healthcare, and critical infrastructure in Europe. The vulnerability could also undermine device trust in Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) environments, increasing the risk of insider threats or data leakage. Given the physical access requirement, remote exploitation is not feasible, limiting the threat to scenarios involving direct device access.

CWE-290Authentication Bypass by Spoofing (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A07:2025: Authentication Failures (opens in a new tab)
This attack-focused weakness is caused by incorrectly implemented authentication schemes that are subject to spoofing attacks.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
REST Security (opens in a new tab)
JSON Web Token for Java (opens in a new tab)
OWASP Authentication (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V3.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.5 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.4 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Creating a Rogue Certification Authority Certificate (opens in a new tab)
Web Services API Signature Forgery Leveraging Hash Function Extension Weakness (opens in a new tab)
Signature Spoof (opens in a new tab)
Signature Spoofing by Misrepresentation (opens in a new tab)
Session Credential Falsification through Prediction (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 11 Sep 2025, 20:34 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-290

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats