Skip to content
Noroxi
CVE-2016-2427· NVD / CVE Program· CNA google_android

The AES-GCM specification in RFC 5084, as used in Android 5.x and 6.x, recommends 12 octets for the aes-ICVlen parameter field, which might

The AES-GCM specification in RFC 5084, as used in Android 5.x and 6.x, recommends 12 octets for the aes-ICVlen parameter field, which might make it easier for attackers to defeat a cryptographic protection mechanism and discover an authentication key via a crafted application, aka internal bug 26234568. NOTE: The vendor disputes the existence of this potential issue in Android, stating "This CVE was raised in error: it referred to the authentication tag size in GCM, whose default according to ASN.1 encoding (12 bytes) can lead to vulnerabilities. After careful consideration, it was decided that the insecure default value of 12 bytes was a default only for the encoding and not default anywhere else in Android, and hence no vulnerability existed.

MediumCVSS 5.5 · v3.0—No exploit No fix recorded
Published
Apr 17, 2016
Updated
Jun 16, 2026
EPSS
0.4% · 34th percentile
Follow this CVE

Sign in to follow · You’ll be notified if a followed record enters KEV, gets an exploit or is updated.

Report tools

JSON

Action score

22

Monitor

Low priority for now.

CVSS
22 / 40 · 5.5 / 10
CISA KEV
0 / 30 · Not listed
EPSS
0 / 30 · 0.4%

Affected systems

VendorProduct
bouncycastlebc-java
googleandroid

Affected versions

NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.

  • bouncycastle bc-java1.54
  • google android5.0
  • google android5.0.1
  • google android5.1
  • google android5.1.0
  • google android6.0
  • google android6.0.1

Other highest-scoring records for the same primary product.

  • CVE-2007-6721The Legion of the Bouncy Castle Java Cryptography API before release 1.38, as used in Crypto Provider Package before 1.36, has unknown impac
    41Plan
  • CVE-2018-1000613Legion of the Bouncy Castle Legion of the Bouncy Castle Java Cryptography APIs 1.58 up to but not including 1.60 contains a CWE-470: Use of
    40Plan
  • CVE-2026-58062Stapled OCSP response accepted without binding to the checked certificate
    37Monitor
  • CVE-2026-8763Name Constraints bypass via trailing dot in rfc822Name and URI
    37Monitor
  • CVE-2026-59650MTI/A0 DH agreement exponentiates unvalidated peer value
    37Monitor
  • CVE-2026-59638JSSE hostname verifier CN-fallback enabled by default despite documented opt-in
    37Monitor

Remediation

Which version to upgrade to

Fix versions compiled from the vendor, package registries and Microsoft. Verify the vendor's note before upgrading.

No fix version is recorded for this entry. Check the references for vendor advisories.

Exploit status

No known public exploit

No public exploit has been observed yet. That doesn't mean you're safe, only that the bar is a little higher.

Research context

For pentesters and researchers: attack profile, score disagreement, timeline, patch commits, credits, variant and chain candidates, bug bounty scope. All derived from existing data; no exploit code.

Timeline

From publication to today: proof of concept, Metasploit module, CISA KEV and fix record. Dates are as reported by the sources.

No dated events beyond publication.

EPSS, last 120 days

FIRST EPSS daily score; only changes of 0.01 or more are recorded (step chart).

Patch and commit links

Commit, PR and diff links among the references. A starting point for patch-diffing and variant hunting; fixes, not exploits.

No commit or PR link among the references.

Finders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.

No credits in the CNA record.

Variant candidates

Same product, same weakness class, within 18 months. If the patch missed the root cause, the sibling bug is here.

No nightly-computed relations.

Chain candidates

An authentication bypass and a privilege-requiring bug in the same product, published close together: combined they may become an unauthenticated path.

—

Bug bounty scope

No known public program.

Source: bounty-targets-data (public HackerOne, Bugcrowd, Intigriti, YesWeHack listings).

Technical details

Attack conditions

  • Someone with local access to the system can trigger it.
  • No account or password is required.
  • A user must open a link or visit a page.
  • No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.

If successful

Confidentiality
high · data can be read
Integrity
none
Availability
none
Attack vector
Local
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
None
User interaction
Required
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality impact
High
Integrity impact
None
Availability impact
None

CVSS vector

CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N

nvd-primary

Root cause

The extension requests broader permissions than its function needs and sends the data it collects out for purposes beyond its stated function.

A representative example of this vulnerability class. Not the vendor's source code; it shows the faulty pattern and its fix.

Vulnerable

json
{  "permissions": ["tabs", "<all_urls>"],  "background": { "service_worker": "analytics.js" }}

Fixed

json
{  "permissions": ["activeTab"],  "host_permissions": ["https://yildiz.example/*"]}

Noroxi analysis

No Noroxi analysis for this record yet

We don't hand-write analysis for all 385,000+ vulnerabilities; that wouldn't be honest. For notable, high-impact vulnerabilities our team writes the mechanism, detection and remediation steps.

We use this product, ask for help

Change log

No changes recorded on tracked fields yet. Score, KEV, exploit maturity and fix status changes appear here.

References

Vendor advisories and official records. Exploit/PoC links are deliberately left out.

All records