CVE-2022-26430
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 mailbox, there is a possible out of bounds write due to type confusion. This could lead to local escalation of privilege with System execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation. Patch ID: ALPS07032521; Issue ID: ALPS07032521.
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 confidenceOut of bounds write vulnerability in the mailbox component caused by type confusion, allowing local privilege escalation from System execution privileges. No user interaction 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= 11.0= 12.0= 3.1= 3.3CVSS 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
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/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.
-
Identify the operating system or productDetermine if the system is running Google Android or Yoctoproject YoctoAffected if The system is neither Android nor Yocto (different products may have similar vulnerabilities but this CVE is specific to these)
-
Check Android versionOn Android, go to Settings > About Phone > Android version or run 'getprop ro.build.version.release' via ADBAffected if Android version is 11.0 or 12.0 exactly (the affected versions listed)
-
Check Yocto versionOn Yocto, check the OS release file or run 'cat /etc/os-release' or check the build configurationAffected if Yocto version is 3.1 or 3.3 exactly (the affected versions listed)
-
Verify the mailbox component is presentCheck for the presence of the mailbox component/service in the system. This is typically a kernel-level or middleware component. On Android, check /proc/mailbox or look for mailbox-related kernel modules. On Yocto, check for mailbox-related processes or kernel configuration options.Affected if The mailbox component is present and running (vulnerability exists in this specific component)
-
Confirm privilege contextDetermine if the system runs services or processes with System-level privileges. On Android, most system services run at this level. Check running processes with 'ps -A' and look for those with system or root UID.Affected if Processes are running with System privileges (exploitation requires escalation from System privileges per the CVE description)
The system is affected if it runs Google Android version 11.0 or 12.0, or Yocto version 3.1 or 3.3, and has the mailbox component present and accessible from System privilege context.
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 vendor patch ALPS07032521 to address the type confusion vulnerability leading to out of bounds write in the mailbox component.
Android: Any Android security update incorporating MediaTek patch ALPS07032521 (check with OEM for specific Android 12L/13 version); Yocto: Updated BSP from vendor including the MediaTek mailbox driver fix
- 1. Contact your device/board manufacturer (OEM/SoM vendor) to request the MediaTek patch ALPS07032521 for the mailbox driver vulnerability.
- 2. For Android devices: Ensure the device receives the latest Android Security Patch Level (SPL) update from your device OEM that includes the MediaTek fix.
- 3. For Yocto-based systems: Apply kernel and driver updates from your Yocto build's BSP (Board Support Package) vendor that incorporate the MediaTek security fix.
- 4. Verify the patch has been applied by checking the kernel version or security patch date after the update.
- 5. If no vendor update is available, consider applying the upstream MediaTek kernel patch ALPS07032521 directly to your custom kernel build if you maintain one.
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $3,968.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2022-26430 — 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-2022-26430 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