CVE-2022-26581
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 · uneditedPAX A930 device with PayDroid_7.1.1_Virgo_V04.3.26T1_20210419 can allow an unauthorized attacker to perform privileged actions through the execution of specific binaries listed in ADB daemon. The attacker must have physical USB access to the device in order to exploit this vulnerability.
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 confidenceThe PAX A930 payment device running PayDroid 7.1.1 contains a vulnerability where the ADB (Android Debug Bridge) daemon allows execution of specific privileged binaries. An attacker with physical USB access to the device can exploit this to perform unauthorized privileged actions, representing a local privilege escalation issue.
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= 7.1.1_virgo_v04.3.26t1_20210419CVSS 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
- Physical
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:P/AC:L/PR:N/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 device modelCheck the device model number by looking at the device hardware label or running 'getprop ro.product.model' via ADB or checking system settings > About deviceAffected if Device is not a PAX A930, then it is not affected by this specific CVE
-
Check the PayDroid firmware versionRun 'getprop ro.build.version.full' or check Settings > About device > Software version to identify the exact PayDroid version stringAffected if Version is exactly 7.1.1_virgo_v04.3.26t1_20210419, then the device matches the affected version
-
Verify if ADB daemon is enabledCheck if ADB is active by running 'getprop ro.debuggable' (returns 1 if enabled) or attempting an ADB connection via USBAffected if ADB daemon is enabled (getprop ro.debuggable returns 1), then the vulnerable attack vector is present
-
Confirm physical USB access exposureInspect the device USB port and verify whether USB debugging is actively allowing connectionsAffected if USB debug connections are permitted and the device has exposed USB ports accessible to attackers, then exploitation is possible
The device is affected only if it is a PAX A930 running PayDroid version 7.1.1_virgo_v04.3.26t1_20210419 with ADB daemon enabled and physically accessible USB ports.
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 dataDisable the ADB daemon on production devices if not required for management; restrict physical access to devices; contact PAX Technology for firmware updates that address this vulnerability; if ADB is required, implement strong access controls and monitoring.
- 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-2022-26581 — 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-2022-26581 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