VulnerabilityPublished 2 Mar 2026Updated 6 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-0005: Google Android · Information Disclosure

Affects Google AndroidSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 6.2 Medium.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 11:52 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

6.2Medium

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

EPSS: 0.1% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 2% 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:H/I:N/A:N

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
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: 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: 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 2 Mar 2026
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponized: 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 30 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.
Weaponized: A Metasploit exploit module or Exploit-DB entry exists (Metasploit scanner modules do not count), 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
GoogleAndroid	Affected =16 =15 =14	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2026-0005, organizations should implement strict physical security controls to prevent unauthorized local access to Android devices running versions 14, 15, or 16. Until official patches are released, disabling app pinning or limiting its use in high-risk environments may reduce exposure. Employing device management solutions to enforce strong lock screen policies and restricting installation of untrusted apps can minimize attack vectors. Monitoring device logs for unusual app interactions may help detect exploitation attempts. Once Google releases patches, prompt application of updates is critical. Additionally, educating users about the risks of leaving devices unattended and encouraging the use of full-disk encryption can further protect sensitive data. Developers should review app permissions and design to limit sensitive data exposure in case of partial app pinning bypass.

Description

In onServiceDisconnected of KeyguardServiceDelegate.java, there is a possible partial bypass of app pinning allowing limited interaction with other apps without knowing the LSKF due to a missing permission check. This could lead to local information disclosure where the extent of interaction and impact is app-dependent with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.

Impact

The primary impact of CVE-2026-0005 is local information disclosure on affected Android devices. Attackers with physical or local access can partially bypass app pinning, potentially accessing sensitive data from other apps without authentication. This could lead to leakage of personal or corporate data, undermining user privacy and security. Because the vulnerability does not grant additional execution privileges or affect system integrity or availability, it is less likely to be used for privilege escalation or denial of service attacks. However, in environments where devices are shared or at risk of unauthorized local access, such as corporate or government settings, the vulnerability could facilitate data leakage or unauthorized information gathering. The lack of user interaction requirement increases the risk of stealthy exploitation. Organizations relying on Android devices for sensitive operations should consider this vulnerability a moderate risk, especially where physical device security is limited.

CWE-200Exposure of Sensitive Information to an Unauthorized Actor (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #20OWASP Top 10 A01:2025: Broken Access Control (opens in a new tab)
The product exposes sensitive information to an actor that is not explicitly authorized to have access to that information.
MITRE discourages mapping vulnerabilities to this broad entry; the root cause is usually a more specific weakness.
Architecture and Design · Separation of Privilege
Compartmentalize the system to have "safe" areas where trust boundaries can be unambiguously drawn. Do not allow sensitive data to go outside of the trust boundary and always be careful when interfacing with a compartment outside of the safe area.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Error Handling (opens in a new tab)
Logging (opens in a new tab)
Authorization (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V8.3.4 (opens in a new tab)
V14.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
V7.3.3 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Subverting Environment Variable Values (opens in a new tab)
ICMP Echo Request Ping (opens in a new tab)
TCP SYN Scan (opens in a new tab)
Enumerate Mail Exchange (MX) Records (opens in a new tab)
DNS Zone Transfers (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

source.android.com/docs/security/bulletin/2026/2026-03-01 (opens in a new tab)

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 10 Mar 2026, 16:53 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-200

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats