CVE-2026-0165
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 several functions of the RTCP packet decoder, there is a possible out-of-bounds read due to a missing bounds check. This could lead to remote information disclosure 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 confidenceAn out-of-bounds read vulnerability exists in the RTCP packet decoder where several functions fail to validate buffer bounds before reading data. This missing bounds check allows an attacker to read beyond allocated memory boundaries, potentially exposing sensitive information from process memory through specially crafted RTCP packets.
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 dataall versionsCVSS 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
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:R/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.
-
Check Android versionRun 'getprop ro.build.version.release' or check Settings > About Phone > Android versionAffected if Any Android version is present, as all versions are affected per the CVE data
-
Identify RTCP-processing componentsCheck running processes for media servers or VoIP services: 'ps -A | grep -iE "media|rtp|voip|rtsp"'Affected if Any media or VoIP service is running that processes RTCP packets
-
Check for RTP/RTCP library presenceSearch for RTCP libraries: 'find /system/lib -name "*rtp*" -o -name "*media*"' or check /proc/mounts for mounted media partitionsAffected if RTP/RTCP libraries or media frameworks are present on the device
-
Inspect active network sockets for RTCPUse 'ss -uan' or 'netstat -uan' to look for UDP port 5009 (RTCP) or other RTP/RTCP port activityAffected if RTCP ports are listening or active connections exist
-
Review media application inventoryCheck installed apps for VoIP, video conferencing, or streaming applications: 'pm list packages | grep -iE "voip|meet|zoom|teams|call|video"'Affected if Applications that process RTCP packets are installed and potentially running
The environment is affected if it is running any Android version and has RTCP-processing capabilities (media frameworks, VoIP apps, or active RTCP sockets) present and enabled.
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 · scopedImplement proper bounds checking in all RTCP packet decoder functions to validate buffer lengths before reading. Input validation should verify packet sizes match declared lengths before processing. Consider adding length field validation at packet entry points.
Android Security Patch Level containing the CVE-2026-0165 fix (check source.android.com/security-bulletin for specific month)
- 1. Check the Android Security Bulletin for the month containing the fix for CVE-2026-0165 at source.android.com/security-bulletin
- 2. Identify the Android security patch level (SPL) that includes the fix for this vulnerability
- 3. Apply the latest Android monthly security update to your device, which can be done via Settings > System > Security Update > Security patch level
- 4. Alternatively, if your device manufacturer provides an OTA update, accept and install it to receive the security patch
- 5. Verify the installed patch level matches or exceeds the fixed version by checking Settings > About Phone > Android version or Security patch level
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- 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-2026-0165 — 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-2026-0165 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