CVE-2024-29748
Google Android ≤ 2024-04-05
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2024-29748 is a high-severity Improper Handling of Exceptional Conditions (CWE-755) vulnerability in Google Android. Its CVSS base score is 7.8 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Client Execution (T1203); ranked at the 49th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); CISA has added it to the Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SC-24 (Fail in Known State) and SI-17 (Fail-safe Procedures) — see the control section below for these in your framework.
Deeper analysis AI-assisted summary
Synthesised by an AI model from the NVD description and linked references — a reading aid, not an authoritative source.
CVE-2024-29748 is a logic error that permits a bypass in affected code, impacting Android devices as documented in the April 2024 Pixel security bulletin. The flaw is tracked under CWE-755 and CWE-280 and carries a CVSS 3.1 score of 7.8, reflecting local attack vector, low complexity, no privileges required, and required user interaction.
An attacker with local access can leverage the vulnerability to escalate privileges without additional execution rights, resulting in full compromise of confidentiality, integrity, and availability on the device once user interaction occurs.
The official Android Pixel bulletin dated 2024-04-01 and corresponding CISA entry describe the availability of patches that address the issue in the April 2024 release; applying those updates is the indicated mitigation.
The vulnerability appears in CISA’s known exploited vulnerabilities catalog, confirming observed in-the-wild activity. Its EPSS score rose from a low baseline to a recorded peak of 0.0118, indicating increased exploitation interest after disclosure.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-26743
Vulnerability Data
there is a possible way to bypass due to a logic error in the code. This could lead to local escalation of privilege with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is needed for exploitation.
- CWE(s)
- KEV Date Added
- 04 April 2024
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
- 7 hardening rules · 3 OS baselines
V6.2.2V8.3.3
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Requires the system to fail to a known safe state on specified failures, limiting the impact of unhandled exceptional conditions.
Mandates explicit fail-safe procedures triggered by indicated failures, structurally preventing unhandled or mishandled exceptional conditions.
Ensuring access decisions are applied to every request structurally prevents the product from taking unexpected paths when privileges are lacking.
A reference monitor that is always invoked guarantees privilege checks occur, eliminating the root condition for improper insufficient-privilege handling.
Access enforcement directly stops code from proceeding on insufficient privileges by applying authorization checks before resource access.
Requires generation of appropriate error messages on exceptional conditions, directly enforcing correct handling rather than silent or incorrect behavior.
Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Defining, enforcing and reviewing access permissions with least privilege directly prevents code paths that mishandle insufficient privileges.
Secure SDLC practices explicitly require proper exception and error handling during design and coding.
Runtime monitoring of software and data surfaces adverse events triggered by unhandled permission failures.
Generating logs of permission-related events enables detection and analysis of improper handling.
Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI
Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.
Security testing in development and acceptance verifies correct handling of exceptional conditions.
Defines access-control policy that should prevent insufficient-privilege situations.
Specifies how access rights are granted, reviewed and revoked, directly addressing privilege handling.
Documented operating procedures may specify exception handling but do not guarantee implementation.
Logging captures unhandled exceptions, aiding detection but not preventing the weakness.
Monitoring can surface unhandled exceptions but does not enforce proper handling.
Hardening callouts derived
Configuration rules from DISA STIG baselines that bear on weaknesses of the type cited by this CVE. Each rule is shown with the relationship its mapping actually records, against the CWE it was authored against. Derived via CVE→CWE over `controls_xwalks` (authoritative rows only; rows rated `none` are excluded).
Oracle Linux 8 (2 rules)
- V-248548 OL 8 must use a Linux Security Module configured to enforce limits on system services. prevents CWE-280
- V-248596 OL 8 must enable the SELinux targeted policy. prevents CWE-280
Oracle Linux 9 (1 rule)
- V-271452 OL 9 must use a Linux Security Module configured to enforce limits on system services. prevents CWE-280
RHEL 9 (2 rules)
- V-258078 RHEL 9 must use a Linux Security Module configured to enforce limits on system services. prevents CWE-280
- V-272496 RHEL 9 must elevate the SELinux context when an administrator calls the sudo command. prevents CWE-280