CVE-2026-3675
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 · uneditedA vulnerability was determined in Freedom Factory dGEN1 up to 20260221. Affected by this issue is the function FakeAppReceiver of the component org.ethosmobile.ethoslauncher. Executing a manipulation can lead to improper authorization. The attack needs to be launched locally. The exploit has been publicly disclosed and may be utilized. The vendor was contacted early about this disclosure but did not respond in any way.
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 confidenceVulnerability in Freedom Factory dGEN1 mobile application (org.ethosmobile.ethoslauncher) where the FakeAppReceiver function suffers from improper authorization. The issue allows a local attacker to potentially bypass authorization controls. The vendor was notified but did not respond.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
CVSS 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
- Low
- Integrity
- Low
- Availability
- Low
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:L/I:L/A:L
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 if dGEN1 app is installedQuery package manager: 'adb shell pm list packages | grep ethos' or 'adb shell pm list packages | grep dgen'Affected if Package org.ethosmobile.ethoslauncher is present on the device
-
Retrieve installed application versionRun 'adb shell dumpsys package org.ethosmobile.ethoslauncher' and check the versionName field under the package infoAffected if Version cannot be determined or is unknown - no version data available to compare against fixed releases
-
Verify FakeAppReceiver component existsRun 'adb shell dumpsys package org.ethosmobile.ethoslauncher' and search for 'FakeAppReceiver' in the receivers sectionAffected if FakeAppReceiver component is registered and exported in the application manifest
-
Check if FakeAppReceiver is exportedDecompile APK with 'apktool d <app.apk>' and inspect AndroidManifest.xml for '<receiver ... android:exported="true" ... android:name=".FakeAppReceiver">'Affected if The receiver has android:exported="true" allowing other apps to send broadcasts to it without authorization
-
Test receiver accessibilityUse 'adb shell am broadcast -a org.ethosmobile.ethoslauncher.FAKE_APP_ACTION -n org.ethosmobile.ethoslauncher/.FakeAppReceiver' to verify the receiver accepts intents from other packagesAffected if The broadcast completes without permission errors, indicating the receiver accepts intents from unauthorized sources
If the dGEN1 app (org.ethosmobile.ethoslauncher) is installed and the FakeAppReceiver component is exported without proper permission checks, the device is affected by this authorization bypass vulnerability.
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 dataVendor-side fix required in the FakeAppReceiver function's authorization logic. Since the vendor did not respond, consider reaching out through alternate channels or assessing if alternative secure applications are available.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing4.0 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 $4,480.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2026-3675 — 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-2026-3675 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