CVE-2026-0096
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 getAppLabel of ForgetDeviceDialogFragment.java, there is a possible trick the user into forgetting a device due to misleading or insufficient UI. This could lead to local escalation of privilege with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not 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 confidenceA UI confusion vulnerability in Android's ForgetDeviceDialogFragment allows a malicious app to manipulate the app label displayed when prompting users to forget a Bluetooth or WiFi device. This misleading UI can trick users into forgetting the wrong device, achieving local privilege escalation without requiring 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= 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.
-
Verify Android version is 16.0Check the device settings under Settings > About Phone > Android version or run 'getprop ro.build.version.release' via ADB shellAffected if The version is exactly 16.0 (this CVE affects only Android 16.0)
-
Confirm ForgetDeviceDialogFragment component existsCheck for the presence of ForgetDeviceDialogFragment in the Android framework or Settings APK by examining /system/framework/framework-res.apk or decompiling Settings.apk for the class com.android.settings.device ForgetDeviceDialogFragmentAffected if The component exists in the system image (vulnerable code is present)
-
Inspect getAppLabel method implementationDecompile or reverse engineer the ForgetDeviceDialogFragment class and examine the getAppLabel method source code to verify if it returns misleading or incomplete app labelsAffected if The getAppLabel method returns incomplete, truncated, or misleading application names instead of full, accurate labels
A user is affected if they are running Android 16.0 and the ForgetDeviceDialogFragment's getAppLabel method returns insufficient or misleading app labels in the device forget dialog UI.
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 dataFix requires improving UI clarity in ForgetDeviceDialogFragment by properly validating and displaying the actual device/app information, ensuring the label accurately represents what device will be forgotten before user confirmation.
- 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-2026-0096 — 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-2026-0096 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