Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2025-48619 is a high-severity Improper Access Control (CWE-284) vulnerability in Google Android. Its CVSS base score is 8.4 (High).
Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Privilege Escalation (T1068); ranked at the 1.0th 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 AC-3 (Access Enforcement) and SI-2 (Flaw Remediation) — 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-2025-48619 is a logic error vulnerability affecting multiple functions in ContentProvider.java within the Android Open Source Project. The flaw enables an app with read-only access to truncate files, which could result in local escalation of privilege. No additional execution privileges or user interaction are required for exploitation.
A local attacker can exploit this vulnerability with low complexity and no privileges (PR:N), as indicated by its CVSS 3.1 score of 8.4 (AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H). Exploitation allows high-impact compromise of confidentiality, integrity, and availability, stemming from CWE-284 (Improper Access Control).
The Android security bulletin at https://source.android.com/docs/security/bulletin/2026/2026-03-01 provides details on affected versions and available patches for mitigation.
OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2025-208211
Vulnerability Data
In multiple functions of ContentProvider.java, there is a possible way for an app with read-only access to truncate files due to a logic error in the code. This could lead to local escalation of privilege with no additional execution privileges…
more
needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI
Why these techniques?
Vulnerability is a local logic flaw enabling file truncation and privilege escalation via improper access control (CWE-284), directly matching exploitation for local privilege escalation.
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Control response
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Directly addresses the logic error by requiring enforcement of approved access authorizations, preventing read-only apps from truncating files.
Mandates identification, reporting, and correction of flaws like the ContentProvider.java logic error via available patches.
Enforces least privilege to limit app capabilities, mitigating local escalation from read-only access violations.
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.
PR.AA-05 directly enforces policy-based access management and least privilege, eliminating most improper-access-control defects, yet CWE-284 also covers implementation flaws and design gaps outside a single management control.
Hardened baselines and deviation monitoring directly eliminate most configuration-induced access-control defects, yet CWE-284 also encompasses code-level and design flaws outside the scope of configuration management alone.
Secure SDLC practices catch most access-control defects during design/coding/testing (mostly), yet leave residual risk from runtime configuration, architecture, and operational controls (partial).
PR.AA-01 supplies managed identities/credentials that support but do not implement access-control decisions, so it only partially prevents CWE-284 in either direction.
Authentication directly blocks unauthenticated actors (partial prevention of CWE-284) but leaves authorization logic, policy enforcement, and role checks untouched, so the control neither eliminates nor fully mitigates the broader weakness.
PR.DS-01 encryption mitigates impact of failed access checks on stored data but neither implements nor constrains access-control logic itself.
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.
Defining and enforcing explicit access rights and restrictions for each entity directly stops the assignment of permissions that exceed what is required, eliminating the root condition that allows improper access control.
Formal authorization, role-based provisioning, and timely revocation of access rights directly stop the creation of accounts or permissions that exceed what the business actually needs.
By enforcing explicit rules on which identities or groups may perform read, write, delete or execute operations and by denying anonymous access to sensitive data, the control directly stops the creation of overly permissive or missing access-control checks.
Requiring one-to-one mapping of identities to entities and timely removal of unused identities directly stops attackers from leveraging stale or shared accounts to bypass access restrictions.
By explicitly transferring security roles and responsibilities when personnel change jobs or leave, the control reduces the chance that former employees retain access rights they no longer need, thereby limiting improper access control.
Physical entry controls enforce explicit authorization and authentication at every access point, directly stopping unauthorized actors from reaching information-processing assets.