Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:NCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2024-40676 is a high-severity Type Confusion (CWE-843) vulnerability in Google Android. Its CVSS base score is 7.7 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 6th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.
The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SA-8 (Security and Privacy Engineering Principles) — 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-2024-40676 is a vulnerability in the checkKeyIntent function of AccountManagerService.java within the Android Open Source Project's platform/frameworks/base component. It stems from a confused deputy issue (CWE-843) that allows bypassing intent security checks, enabling the installation of an unknown app. The vulnerability carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 7.7 (AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N) and was published on 2025-01-28.
A local attacker requires no privileges, user interaction, or additional execution capabilities to exploit this issue. Exploitation results in local escalation of privilege, providing high impacts on confidentiality and integrity by allowing unauthorized app installation and privilege elevation on the affected device.
The Android Security Bulletin for October 2024 details the patch and mitigation steps at https://source.android.com/security/bulletin/2024-10-01. The specific fix is implemented in commit e8a53246607b52b15269f97aef9ba7e928ba2473, available at https://android.googlesource.com/platform/frameworks/base/+/e8a53246607b52b15269f97aef9ba7e928ba2473; practitioners should prioritize updating affected Android devices to versions incorporating this patch.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2024-38798
Vulnerability Data
In checkKeyIntent of AccountManagerService.java, there is a possible way to bypass intent security check and install an unknown app due to a confused deputy. This could lead to local escalation of privilege with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction…
more
is not needed for exploitation.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
—
—
—
V1.5.2V3.2.3V15.3.5
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation (including fuzzing and type-aware analysis) directly finds type-confusion flaws before deployment.
Engineering principles can require use of type-safe languages, static typing, and runtime type checks that structurally avoid allocating one type and accessing another.
Memory-protection controls limit the blast radius when a type-confusion access occurs but do not stop the flaw itself.
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.
Secure SDLC practices directly prevent type-confusion flaws via safe typing, static analysis, and code review while the control itself addresses many additional weaknesses.
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 can detect type-confusion vulnerabilities through fuzzing and static analysis.
Secure SDLC mandates type-safe design and review that can catch type-confusion flaws.
Application security requirements can specify strong typing and interface contracts that reduce type confusion.
Secure architecture principles promote type-safe languages and memory-safety mechanisms that mitigate type confusion.
Secure coding standards directly forbid unsafe type casts and require static-analysis checks for type confusion.