CVE-2024-49742
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 onCreate of NotificationAccessConfirmationActivity.java , there is a possible way to hide an app with notification access in Settings due to a missing permission check. This could lead to local escalation of privilege with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is needed for exploitation.
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 confidenceThis is a vulnerability in Android's Settings app where NotificationAccessConfirmationActivity lacks a proper permission check in its onCreate method. The missing validation allows a malicious local application to hide or manipulate visibility of apps that have been granted notification access permissions, resulting in local privilege escalation.
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= 12.0= 12.1= 13.0= 14.0= 15.0CVSS 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.
-
Check your Android versionGo to Settings > About Phone > Android version (or Settings > System > About Phone > Android version). Record the exact version number shown.Affected if The version is 12.0, 12.1, 13.0, 14.0, or 15.0 exactly as listed in the affected versions.
-
Confirm you are using the stock Settings appVerify that the Settings application on your device is the original Google/Android system Settings app and not a third-party replacement. Check the app package name in Settings > Apps > Settings - it should be com.android.settings.Affected if You are using a custom or third-party Settings app instead of the stock Android Settings app, as the vulnerability exists in the stock NotificationAccessConfirmationActivity.
-
Review apps with notification accessGo to Settings > Apps > Special access > Notification access (or Settings > Sound & notification > Notification access). Examine the list of apps granted NotificationListenerService access.Affected if Any untrusted or malicious application has been granted notification access permissions, as this is the condition required for a local attacker to exploit the missing permission check in NotificationAccessConfirmationActivity.
-
Check for unexpected behavior in SettingsOpen the Settings app and navigate to Apps > See all apps, then look for any apps that have notification access (usually under the Apps section or in notification settings). Compare against apps you intentionally granted access to.Affected if Apps that you did not grant notification access are showing as having that permission, or apps you granted access are now hidden, indicating potential exploitation of this vulnerability.
You are affected if your Android version is exactly 12.0, 12.1, 13.0, 14.0, or 15.0, you are using the stock Settings app, and a potentially untrusted app has notification listener access permissions.
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 the vendor patch from Google for CVE-2024-49742; until then, users should exercise caution when granting notification access permissions and monitor for unexpected behavior in the Settings app.
Android 14.0 or later with the corresponding security patch (check Android Security Bulletin for the specific build/PL level)
- Check the Android Security Bulletin for CVE-2024-49742 to confirm the specific Android version containing the fix
- Upgrade the device to Android 14.0 with the latest security patch level (or the earliest Android version beyond 14.0 that includes the patch)
- Verify the upgrade was successful by checking Settings > About Phone > Android version and Security patch level
- Confirm the NotificationAccessConfirmationActivity.java now includes proper permission checks in the onCreate method by reviewing the source code at source.android.com if needed
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing12.0 h
- Review / QA6.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,192.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-49742 — 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-2024-49742 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