VulnerabilityPublished 4 Sep 2025

CVE-2025-48551: Google Android · Information Disclosure

Affects Google AndroidSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.0 Medium.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 17:16 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.0Medium

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

EPSS: 0.07% 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:L/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: High
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: Low: The attacker is authorized with (i.e., requires) privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges may have the ability to cause an impact only to non-sensitive resources.
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: High: There is total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the impacted component being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact.
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 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
Google Android	Affected 13 – 16 4 affected builds	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

European organizations should implement several targeted mitigation strategies beyond generic advice: 1) Enforce strict mobile device management (MDM) policies that restrict installation of untrusted or third-party applications and enforce app vetting to reduce the risk of malicious apps exploiting this vulnerability. 2) Educate users about the risks of interacting with untrusted content or applications, emphasizing caution when opening images or files from unknown sources. 3) Monitor and restrict the use of Android devices in sensitive environments, especially where sensitive image data is processed or stored. 4) Apply security updates and patches promptly once Google or device manufacturers release fixes for this vulnerability. In the interim, consider disabling or limiting features that involve image sharing or processing if feasible. 5) Employ endpoint detection and response (EDR) solutions capable of monitoring anomalous local access patterns to image data or suspicious user interactions that could indicate exploitation attempts. 6) Conduct regular security audits and penetration testing focused on mobile device security to identify potential exploitation vectors related to this vulnerability.

Description

In multiple locations, there is a possible leak of an image across the Android User isolation boundary due to a confused deputy. This could lead to local information disclosure with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is needed for exploitation.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a privacy and data confidentiality risk, especially for entities handling sensitive visual data on Android devices, such as healthcare providers, financial institutions, and government agencies. Since the vulnerability allows local information disclosure without elevated privileges, it could be exploited by malicious insiders or through social engineering attacks that induce user interaction. The impact is particularly significant for organizations with Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) policies or those that rely heavily on Android mobile devices for business operations. Unauthorized access to image data could lead to leakage of confidential information, intellectual property, or personally identifiable information (PII), potentially violating GDPR and other data protection regulations. Although the vulnerability does not affect system integrity or availability, the confidentiality breach could result in reputational damage, regulatory fines, and loss of customer trust. The requirement for user interaction somewhat limits the attack surface but does not eliminate the risk, especially in environments where users may be targeted with phishing or social engineering campaigns.

CWE-441Unintended Proxy or Intermediary ('Confused Deputy') (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessOWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product receives a request, message, or directive from an upstream component, but the product does not sufficiently preserve the original source of the request before forwarding the request to an external actor that is outside of the product's control sphere. This causes the product to appear to be the source of the request, leading it to act as a proxy or other intermediary between the upstream component and the external actor.
Architecture and Design
Enforce the use of strong mutual authentication mechanism between the two parties.
Architecture and Design
Whenever a product is an intermediary or proxy for transactions between two other components, the proxy core should not drop the identity of the initiator of the transaction. The immutability of the identity of the initiator must be maintained and should be forwarded all the way to the target.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
XML Routing Detour Attacks (opens in a new tab)
Transparent Proxy Abuse (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, 20:30 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-441

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats