CVE-2020-0391
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 applyPolicy of PackageManagerService.java, there is possible arbitrary command execution as System due to an unenforced protected-broadcast. This could lead to local escalation of privilege with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.Product: AndroidVersions: Android-9 Android-10 Android-11Android ID: A-158570769
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 · high confidenceIn Android's PackageManagerService, the applyPolicy method sends a broadcast without proper protection (unenforced protected-broadcast), allowing any local application to intercept and inject arbitrary commands that execute with System privileges. This enables local privilege escalation without user interaction.
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= 9.0= 10.0CVSS 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
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
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.
-
Identify Android versionCheck system settings under 'About phone' or run 'getprop ro.build.version.release' via ADB shellAffected if Version is 9.0 (Pie) or 10.0 exactly
-
Confirm PackageManagerService applyPolicy existsLocate the applyPolicy method in the PackageManagerService implementation within the system frameworkAffected if The applyPolicy method sends a broadcast without protected-broadcast enforcement
-
Verify broadcast protection statusInspect the broadcast intent in applyPolicy for android:protectionLevel='signature' or 'signatureOrSystem' in the AndroidManifest.xml declarations, or check if the broadcast is declared as a protected-broadcastAffected if The broadcast is not declared as a protected-broadcast or lacks signature-level protection
-
Test for broadcast interceptionUse a local test application to register a broadcast receiver for the intent action used by applyPolicy and observe if it receives the broadcastAffected if A non-privileged local app can successfully register a receiver and intercept the policy broadcast
If the device runs Android 9.0 or 10.0 and the PackageManagerService applyPolicy broadcast lacks protected-broadcast enforcement, the device is vulnerable to local privilege escalation.
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 AOSP patch to enforce protected-broadcast security in PackageManagerService.java, ensuring only authorized system components can send/receive the policy broadcast.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,616.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2020-0391 — 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-2020-0391 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