CVE-2026-20451
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 slbc, there is a possible out of bounds write due to type confusion. 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: ALPS10828685; Issue ID: MSV-6504.
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 the slbc component (a system service in MediaTek-based firmware), a type confusion vulnerability allows an attacker who already has System-level privileges to trigger an out-of-bounds write, potentially achieving local privilege escalation. No user interaction is required for exploitation.
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 versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- High
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:H/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.
-
Identify MediaTek SoC modelCheck the system-on-chip (SoC) model on the device. On Android devices, this can be found via 'cat /proc/cpuinfo' or in the device's technical specifications. Look for any of these model numbers: Mt8115, Mt8186, Mt8188, Mt8196, Mt8365, Mt8367, Mt8370, Mt8371.Affected if The device uses any of the listed MediaTek SoC models (Mt8115, Mt8186, Mt8188, Mt8196, Mt8365, Mt8367, Mt8370, Mt8371).
-
Check if slbc service is presentLocate the slbc binary or service on the firmware. Search for files named 'slbc', 'slbc_service', or similar in system directories such as /system/bin/, /vendor/bin/, or /sbin/. On Android, you can use 'find / -name '*slbc*' 2>/dev/null' to search.Affected if The slbc component exists on the device, as the vulnerability resides specifically in this service.
-
Verify firmware version and patch levelCheck the installed firmware version. On Android devices, this is typically found in Settings > About Phone > Build Number, or via 'getprop ro.build.version.incremental' or 'getprop ro.build.date'. Compare against the vendor patch ALPS10828685 (MSV-6504).Affected if The firmware version does not include the vendor patch ALPS10828685 (MSV-6504), meaning the vulnerability remains unpatched.
-
Assess privilege contextDetermine if any user or process on the system has System-level privileges. On Android, System privileges are held by apps signed with the platform key or processes running under the 'system' user. Review running processes and installed applications with elevated permissions.Affected if An attacker already has System-level privileges on the device, which is required to exploit this vulnerability.
A device is affected if it uses any of the listed MediaTek SoC models (Mt8115, Mt8186, Mt8188, Mt8196, Mt8365, Mt8367, Mt8370, Mt8371), contains the slbc service, does not have the ALPS10828685 patch applied, and an attacker can obtain System-level privileges on the device.
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 vendor patch ALPS10828685 (MSV-6504) via firmware/OTA update to affected devices. Since the attacker requires System privilege, ensure strong access controls and monitoring around accounts with elevated privileges.
- Consultation3.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing3.0 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 $3,984.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-20451 — 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-2026-20451 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