CVE-2022-26428
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 video codec, there is a possible memory corruption due to a race condition. This could lead to local escalation of privilege with System execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation. Patch ID: ALPS06521260; Issue ID: ALPS06521260.
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 confidenceA race condition in the video codec component causes memory corruption, enabling a local attacker with no user interaction to escalate privileges to System execution level. The vulnerability stems from improper synchronization in the MediaTek ALPS video codec implementation.
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= 11.0= 12.0CVSS 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
- High
- Privileges
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:H/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.
-
Check Android versionGo to Settings > About Phone > Android version or run 'getprop ro.build.version.release' in ADB shellAffected if Version is exactly 11.0 or exactly 12.0
-
Verify MediaTek chipsetRun 'getprop ro.hardware' or 'getprop ro.chipset' in ADB shell, or check device specifications for MediaTek processorAffected if Device uses a MediaTek chipset (the vulnerability is in MediaTek ALPS video codec)
-
Confirm video codec component presenceCheck for MediaTek video codec drivers by examining /vendor/lib/ or /system/lib/ for modules containing 'codec', 'video', or 'mtk' in filenames, or run 'ls -la /vendor/lib/media_codecs.xml' if presentAffected if MediaTek video codec component is present on the device
-
Check if video codec is accessibleVerify the video codec service is running via 'ps -A | grep -i codec' or check /proc/mtk_vcodec or similar paths indicating the codec driver is loadedAffected if Video codec component is loaded or accessible on the system
Device is affected if it runs Android 11.0 or 12.0 on a MediaTek chipset and has the MediaTek ALPS video codec component present and accessible.
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.
dbcve · scopedApply patch ALPS06521260 through the appropriate firmware or system update mechanism for affected MediaTek-based devices. Verify the video codec functionality post-patch.
- Contact your device manufacturer (OEM) to confirm they have applied MediaTek patch ALPS06521260
- Request the specific Android security patch level that includes this fix from your device OEM
- Apply the OEM-supplied system update containing the MediaTek security fix
- Verify the device is running the patched Android security update (typically January 2022 or later security patch level)
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing8.0 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 $4,288.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-26428 — 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-2022-26428 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