In adbd_tls_verify_cert of auth.cpp, there is a possible bypass of wireless ADB mutual authentication due to a logic error in the code.
Noroxi assessment
Priority: Monitor (action score 35/100)
- Public proof-of-concept code exists (GitHub); there is no record of exploitation in the wild.
- Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days: 0.54% (FIRST EPSS).
- Someone on the same network segment can trigger it. No account or password is required. No user action is required. No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
- According to the record, no fixed version is available yet.
Low priority for now. Update when a fix is released; follow the vendor's advisory.
Generated automatically from the record's data: CVSS (NVD and CNA), CISA KEV and SSVC, FIRST EPSS, exploit sources, fixed versions. How we calculate it
Primary sources: NVD · CVE.org · FIRST EPSS
In adbd_tls_verify_cert of auth.cpp, there is a possible bypass of wireless ADB mutual authentication due to a logic error in the code. This could lead to remote (proximal/adjacent) code execution as the shell user with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.
- Published
- May 4, 2026
- Updated
- Jun 17, 2026
- EPSS
- 0.5% · 44th percentile
- CWE
- CWE-303
Report tools
Action score
35
Monitor
Low priority for now.
- CVSS
- 35 / 40 · 8.8 / 10
- CISA KEV
- 0 / 30 · Not listed
- EPSS
- 0 / 30 · 0.5%
CISA SSVC decision
- Exploitation
- none
- Automatable
- no
- Technical impact
- total
Vulnrichment: CISA's decision-tree inputs.
Get told when this record changes
- Not in KEV: no record of exploitation in the wild
- Proof of concept exists, no weaponized module
- No fixed version yet
If any of these changes, we'll tell you in the daily email digest.
Running WordPress? Scan your site free with WP Lens
Noroxi analysis
What does it mean in your environment?
The assessment above is generated automatically from the record's data; it doesn't know your environment. Our team verifies on your systems whether this vulnerability is actually exploitable and which mitigation is enough.
We use this product, ask for helpAffected systems
Is your version affected?
Pick the product and type the version you run. It's compared with this record's version ranges in your browser; the version isn't sent anywhere.
| Vendor | Product | CPE |
|---|---|---|
| android | cpe:2.3:o:google:android |
Affected versions
NVD version ranges (for catalog products). Add the product to your stack with a version and matching uses these.
- google android14.0
- google android15.0
- google android16.0
Versions reported by the vendor
Affected version ranges reported by the assigning authority (google_android). Independent of NVD's CPE analysis and usually ahead of it.
Google Android
- 16-qpr2, 16, 15, 14affected
Same product
google: all recordsOther highest-scoring records for the same primary product.
- CVE-2019-2215A use-after-free in binder.c allows an elevation of privilege from an application to the Linux Kernel.KEV83Now
- CVE-2011-1823The vold volume manager daemon on Android 3.0 and 2.x before 2.3.4 trusts messages that are received from a PF_NETLINK socket, which allows KEV73This week
- CVE-2015-1538Integer overflow in the SampleTable::setSampleToChunkParams function in SampleTable.cpp in libstagefright in Android before 5.1.1 LMY48I all70This week
Published before and after this one in the same product
- ← EarlierCVE-2025-48651Apr 6, 2026 · In importWrappedKey of KMKeymasterApplet.java, there is a possible way access keys that should be restricted due to improper input validatio22Monitor
- ← EarlierCVE-2026-0049Apr 6, 2026 · In onHeaderDecoded of LocalImageResolver.java, there is a possible persistent denial of service due to resource exhaustion.24Monitor
- Later →CVE-2025-71251May 5, 2026 · In IMS, there is a possible system crash due to improper input validation.30Monitor
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
Proof of concept available
A public proof of concept or detection signature exists. Exploit knowledge is out there; don't delay patching.
Evidence
- Proof-of-concept repository on GitHub ×14
Noroxi does not host or link to exploit code. Metasploit module names and Nuclei template ids are shown (names, not code); Exploit-DB entries and PoC repositories are given as counts only.
| Source | Kind | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Proof-of-concept repository on GitHub | stars:5 | 2026-05-05 |
| Proof-of-concept repository on GitHub | stars:84 | 2026-05-05 |
| Proof-of-concept repository on GitHub | stars:68 | 2026-05-06 |
| Proof-of-concept repository on GitHub | stars:22 | 2026-05-06 |
| Proof-of-concept repository on GitHub | stars:8 | 2026-05-07 |
| Proof-of-concept repository on GitHub | stars:5 | 2026-05-07 |
| Proof-of-concept repository on GitHub | stars:1 | 2026-05-09 |
| Proof-of-concept repository on GitHub | stars:15 | 2026-05-13 |
| Proof-of-concept repository on GitHub | stars:29 | 2026-05-20 |
| Proof-of-concept repository on GitHub | stars:0 | 2026-05-25 |
| Proof-of-concept repository on GitHub | stars:1 | 2026-06-04 |
| Proof-of-concept repository on GitHub | stars:3 | 2026-06-27 |
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.
- Published
- First PoCsame day
- TodayOct 23, 2026+172 d
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.
Credits
All researchersFinders, reporters and analysts named in the CNA record. Click a name for that researcher’s other records.
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 on the same network segment can trigger it.
- No account or password is required.
- No user action is required.
- No special conditions are required; it is repeatable.
If successful
- Confidentiality
- high · data can be read
- Integrity
- high · data or configuration can be modified
- Availability
- high · the service can be disrupted
- Attack vector
- Adjacent
- Attack complexity
- Low
- Privileges required
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality impact
- High
- Integrity impact
- High
- Availability impact
- High
Weakness class (CWE)
CWE-303 · Incorrect Implementation of Authentication AlgorithmCVSS vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
nvd-secondary
Attack context
MITRE CAPEC attack patterns and ATT&CK techniques for this weakness class (CWE). A starting point for detection rules and threat hunting.
Attack patterns (CAPEC)
ATT&CK techniques
—
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.