CVE-2020-0035
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedIn query of TelephonyProvider.java, there is a possible access to SIM card info due to a missing permission check. This could lead to local information disclosure with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.Product: AndroidVersions: Android-8.0 Android-8.1 Android-9Android ID: A-140622024
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · moderate confidenceIn TelephonyProvider.java, a missing permission check allows local apps to query SIM card information without proper authorization, leading to information disclosure. No user interaction or elevated privileges are required for exploitation.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data= 8.0= 8.1= 9.0CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:N/A:N
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Check Android versionGo to Settings > About Phone > Android version, or run 'getprop ro.build.version.release' via ADBAffected if Version is 8.0, 8.1, or 9.0 (all three are affected)
-
Verify TelephonyProvider is accessibleCheck if the TelephonyProvider content provider is accessible by attempting to query content://telephony/siminfo via ADB shell or an app without READ_PHONE_STATE permissionAffected if Query returns SIM card information without requesting or requiring READ_PHONE_STATE permission
-
Confirm missing permission enforcementReview TelephonyProvider.java code in the device's framework, specifically checking for enforcement of READ_PHONE_STATE or equivalent permission before returning SIM infoAffected if No permission check is found before returning SIM data in the TelephonyProvider
-
Check security patch levelGo to Settings > About Phone > Security patch level, or run 'getprop ro.build.version.security_patch' via ADBAffected if Security patch level is earlier than the patch that addresses CVE-2020-0035 (the fix was released in Android's March 2020 security update)
A device is affected if it runs Android 8.0, 8.1, or 9.0 AND the TelephonyProvider allows querying SIM information without requiring READ_PHONE_STATE permission, indicating the missing permission check vulnerability is present.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataApply the Android security patch for CVE-2020-0035 which adds proper permission checks to the TelephonyProvider. For custom ROMs or embedded Android systems, add runtime permission verification before returning SIM card data.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,152.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-0035 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2020-0035 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data