CVE-2023-20962
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 getSliceEndItem of MediaVolumePreferenceController.java, there is a possible way to start foreground activity from the background due to an unsafe PendingIntent. This could lead to local information disclosure with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.Product: AndroidVersions: Android-13Android ID: A-256590210
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 13's MediaVolumePreferenceController, the getSliceEndItem method creates an unsafe PendingIntent that allows a foreground activity to be started from the background context. This violates Android's background activity launch restrictions and enables local information disclosure without requiring user interaction or additional execution privileges.
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= 13.0CVSS 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.
-
Verify Android versionCheck the device or system Android version (Settings > About Phone > Android version). Confirm it is exactly 13.0.Affected if The Android version is 13.0 (specifically the = 13.0 range)
-
Identify MediaVolumePreferenceController usageSearch application code or system services for any references to MediaVolumePreferenceController or the getSliceEndItem method.Affected if The MediaVolumePreferenceController is present and getSliceEndItem is being called in the environment
-
Inspect PendingIntent creation in getSliceEndItemExamine the source code of MediaVolumePreferenceController.java, specifically the getSliceEndItem method, for how the PendingIntent is constructed.Affected if The PendingIntent is created without FLAG_IMMUTABLE or other protective flags (the vulnerable condition)
-
Monitor for background activity launchesCheck system logs (logcat) for suspicious ActivityManager logs showing background activity launches related to volume slice items.Affected if Unexpected background-to-foreground activity transitions are occurring from the volume preference controller
If running Android 13.0 and the MediaVolumePreferenceController is active without FLAG_IMMUTABLE on its PendingIntent, the environment is affected by this vulnerability.
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 dataThe PendingIntent should be created with FLAG_IMMUTABLE (or other appropriate flags like FLAG_NO_CREATE) to prevent unauthorized modification or reuse by malicious applications that may obtain the intent.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $3,872.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2023-20962 — 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-2023-20962 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