CVE-2025-20778
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 display, there is a possible out of bounds write due to a missing bounds check. This could lead to local escalation of privilege if a malicious actor has already obtained the System privilege. User interaction is not needed for exploitation. Patch ID: ALPS10184870; Issue ID: MSV-4729.
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 missing bounds check in the display component allows an out-of-bounds write, enabling local privilege escalation from System privilege to higher privileges without user interaction.
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= 14.0= 15.0= 16.0CVSS 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 Android OS versionGo to Settings > About Phone > Android version or run 'getprop ro.build.version.release' via ADB shellAffected if Version is 14.0, 15.0, or 16.0 exactly (note: patch levels may vary, compare to affected versions)
-
Verify System-level access exists on the deviceReview running services and processes with System privilege using 'dumpsys' or check for apps with SYSTEM_ALERT_WINDOW or other system-level permissionsAffected if Any untrusted process or app has System-level access or privilege escalation would provide meaningful additional access
-
Identify display component patch levelCheck display-related system properties via 'getprop | grep display' or review SELinux policies related to display subsystem in /sys/kernel/debug or /d/Affected if Patch ALPS10184870 has not been applied to the display component
-
Review display service configurationExamine the display service (SurfaceFlinger or similar) configuration and permissions via 'dumpsys surfaceflinger' or 'dumpsys display'Affected if The display service runs with elevated privileges and lacks the bounds-checking fix
-
Audit apps with elevated privilegesList all apps holding 'signature|system' level permissions using 'pm list permissions -s' and review which have access to display subsystem APIsAffected if Untrusted applications have access to display component interfaces that could trigger the out-of-bounds write
The device is affected if it runs Android 14.0, 15.0, or 16.0 and contains a display component without the ALPS10184870 patch, especially if untrusted code can obtain System-level access.
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 dataApply patch ALPS10184870 to the display component. Since exploitation requires System-level access, prioritize preventing initial compromise through standard security controls.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-20778 — 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-2025-20778 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