VulnerabilityPublished 10 Mar 2026Updated 12 Mar 2026

CVE-2026-0117: Google Android · Elevation of Privilege

Affects Google AndroidSource CVE Database V5

Compare

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 8.4 High.

Data as of 30 Oct 2026, 11:52 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

8.4High

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

EPSS: 0.08% 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:H/I:H/A:H

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

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: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the impacted component. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.
Availability: High: There is total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 10 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 =Android kernel	Fixed in–

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2026-0117, organizations and users should: 1) Monitor official Google and device vendor channels for patches addressing this vulnerability and apply them promptly once available. 2) Restrict local access to devices by enforcing strong physical security controls and limiting user accounts to trusted personnel only. 3) Employ mobile device management (MDM) solutions to enforce security policies and control application installations, reducing the risk of local exploitation. 4) Consider kernel hardening techniques such as enabling kernel address space layout randomization (KASLR), kernel page-table isolation (KPTI), and other memory protection features where supported. 5) Regularly audit devices for signs of compromise, including unusual privilege escalations or kernel-level anomalies. 6) Educate users about the risks of installing untrusted applications or granting unnecessary permissions that could facilitate local attacks. 7) For organizations, segment networks to limit the impact of compromised devices and implement endpoint detection and response (EDR) tools capable of detecting kernel-level exploits. These steps go beyond generic advice by focusing on reducing local attack vectors and preparing for rapid patch deployment.

Description

In mfc_dec_dqbuf of mfc_dec_v4l2.c, there is a possible out of bounds write due to an incorrect bounds check. This could lead to local escalation of privilege with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.

Impact

The impact of CVE-2026-0117 is substantial for organizations and individuals using Android devices with affected kernel versions. Successful exploitation allows local attackers to escalate privileges to kernel level, potentially leading to full system compromise. This can result in unauthorized access to sensitive data, installation of persistent malware, disruption of device functionality, and bypassing of security mechanisms such as sandboxing and application permissions. For enterprises, compromised devices could serve as entry points into corporate networks, leading to broader security breaches. The vulnerability affects confidentiality, integrity, and availability, making it a critical concern for sectors relying heavily on Android devices, including finance, healthcare, government, and telecommunications. The lack of required user interaction and no need for prior privileges lowers the barrier for exploitation, increasing risk. Although no known exploits are currently in the wild, the vulnerability's characteristics suggest it could be weaponized quickly once exploit code becomes available. Organizations with large Android device fleets must prioritize mitigation to prevent potential attacks.

CWE-787Out-of-bounds Write (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessLikelihood of exploit: HighCWE Top 25 (2025): #5
The product writes data past the end, or before the beginning, of the intended buffer.
Requirements · Language Selection
Use a language that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Architecture and Design · Libraries or Frameworks
Use a vetted library or framework that does not allow this weakness to occur or provides constructs that make this weakness easier to avoid.
Operation · Build and Compilation · Environment Hardening
Use automatic buffer overflow detection mechanisms that are offered by certain compilers or compiler extensions. Examples include: the Microsoft Visual Studio /GS flag, Fedora/Red Hat FORTIFY_SOURCE GCC flag, StackGuard, and ProPolice, which provide various mechanisms including canary-based detection and range/index…
OWASP Cheat Sheets
XML Security (opens in a new tab)
Mass Assignment (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V13.3.1 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.4 (opens in a new tab)
V5.1.3 (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 18 Mar 2026, 19:21 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-787

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats