CVE-2025-48610VulnerabilityPublished 8 Dec 2025Updated 17 Dec 2025

CVE-2025-48610: Google Android · Information disclosure

Affects Google AndroidSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 5.5 Medium.

Data as of 25 Oct 2026, 19:02 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

5.5Medium

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:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
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: 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: 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 8 Dec 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 2026-10-25.

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

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2025-48610, European organizations should implement a layered approach: 1) Restrict local access to Android devices by enforcing strong device authentication, disabling unnecessary user accounts, and limiting app permissions to reduce the attack surface. 2) Monitor for unusual local activity on devices, including attempts to access kernel memory or escalate privileges. 3) Maintain up-to-date device firmware and operating system versions, applying security patches promptly once Google releases a fix for this vulnerability. 4) Employ mobile device management (MDM) solutions to enforce security policies, control app installations, and remotely manage devices. 5) Educate users about the risks of installing untrusted applications or granting excessive permissions that could facilitate local exploitation. 6) For high-security environments, consider isolating critical Android devices or using hardware-backed security features to limit kernel exposure. 7) Collaborate with vendors and security communities to stay informed about emerging exploits and mitigation techniques related to this vulnerability.

Description

In __pkvm_guest_relinquish_to_host of mem_protect.c, there is a possible configuration data leak due to a logic error in the code. This could lead to local information disclosure with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact of CVE-2025-48610 lies in the potential exposure of sensitive configuration data on Android devices used within corporate environments. This could include smartphones, tablets, or embedded Android systems used in operational technology or mobile workforces. Information disclosure can facilitate more sophisticated attacks, such as privilege escalation or targeted exploitation, by revealing internal system details. While the vulnerability does not directly compromise system integrity or availability, the confidentiality breach could lead to indirect impacts, including data leakage or unauthorized access. Organizations with high reliance on Android devices for sensitive communications or data processing—such as financial institutions, healthcare providers, and government agencies—may face increased risk. The local access requirement somewhat limits the threat to insiders or attackers who have already compromised a device to some extent. However, given the widespread use of Android in Europe, the vulnerability could be leveraged in multi-stage attacks against valuable targets.

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 17 Dec 2025, 16:50 UTC

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats