CVE-2026-0035
Memory Safety in Google Android 14.0 … 16.0
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HSummary
CVE-2026-0035 is a high-severity Out-of-bounds Read (CWE-125) 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 1th 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-15 (Development Process, Standards, and Tools) — 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-2026-0035 is a logic error in the createRequest function of MediaProvider.java within Android, allowing an app to gain read/write access to non-existing files. This vulnerability enables local escalation of privilege without requiring additional execution privileges or user interaction. It is associated with CWE-125 (Out-of-bounds Read) and CWE-787 (Out-of-bounds Write), and carries a CVSS v3.1 base score of 8.4 (AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H).
A local attacker, such as a malicious app running on the device with no special privileges, can exploit this issue due to its low attack complexity and lack of need for user interaction. Exploitation leads to arbitrary read/write access on non-existing files, resulting in escalation of privilege and high impacts to confidentiality, integrity, and availability.
The Android security bulletin provides details on patches and mitigation at https://source.android.com/docs/security/bulletin/2026/2026-03-01.
EU & UK References
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-9248
Vulnerability Data
In createRequest of MediaProvider.java, there is a possible way for an app to gain read/write access to non-existing 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 Techniques
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing and evaluation directly finds out-of-bounds read flaws through static analysis, fuzzing, and dynamic bounds checks.
Requiring documented secure-development standards and tools can mandate bounds-checked coding practices that avoid the weakness.
Secure engineering principles require bounds checking and memory-safe constructs that stop out-of-bounds reads from being introduced.
Process isolation confines the effects of an out-of-bounds read to the compromised process.
Input validation rejects malformed indices or lengths that would otherwise cause reads outside buffer bounds.
Memory-protection mechanisms limit the exploitability and blast radius of a successful out-of-bounds write.
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-development practices such as bounds checking and memory-safe languages directly prevent out-of-bounds reads.
Vulnerability scanning and recording can discover instances of out-of-bounds reads after code is deployed.
Routine patching replaces vulnerable code containing out-of-bounds read flaws.
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 includes fuzzing and static analysis that detect out-of-bounds read defects before release.
Logging can record evidence of an out-of-bounds read but does not prevent the weakness itself.
Secure development life cycle mandates input validation and bounds checking that directly prevent out-of-bounds reads.
Application security requirements include explicit bounds and memory-safety specifications that mitigate buffer over-reads.
Secure system architecture and engineering principles require memory-safe design patterns and runtime protections against out-of-bounds access.
Secure coding standards explicitly forbid unsafe pointer arithmetic and mandate bounds-checked reads, eliminating CWE-125.