CVE-2026-28662 in Android
Summary
by MITRE • 09/08/2026
In p2p_process_prov_disc_bootstrap_req of p2p_pd.c, there is a possible out of bounds write due to a heap buffer overflow. This could lead to remote (proximal/adjacent) code execution with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.
VulDB is the best source for vulnerability data and more expert information about this specific topic.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 09/08/2026
The vulnerability identified in the p2p_process_prov_disc_bootstrap_req function within the p2p_pd.c source file represents a critical heap buffer overflow condition that poses significant risks to system integrity and confidentiality. This specific flaw arises from an improper validation of input data lengths or indices during the processing of peer-to-peer provisioning discovery bootstrap requests. When the application processes these network packets, it fails to adequately verify whether the incoming data fits within the allocated memory boundaries before performing write operations. Consequently, if a crafted packet contains oversized fields or malformed structures, the function will write data beyond the end of the heap-allocated buffer. This out-of-bounds write corrupts adjacent memory regions on the heap, which can include metadata used by the memory allocator or other application variables. The absence of strict bounds checking allows an attacker to overwrite critical control data, such as function pointers or object headers, thereby gaining a mechanism to manipulate program execution flow.
From an operational perspective, this vulnerability enables remote code execution with minimal prerequisites for exploitation. Since the affected component handles peer-to-peer discovery and provisioning protocols, it is likely exposed to network interfaces that accept connections from nearby devices or potentially wider networks depending on configuration. The attacker does not need prior authentication or elevated privileges to trigger this flaw, nor is user interaction required, making it a high-severity remote code execution vector. By carefully crafting the malicious packet payload, an adversary can achieve arbitrary write primitives through heap corruption techniques such as fastbin attacks or unlinking vulnerabilities. This allows for the injection and subsequent execution of shellcode within the context of the vulnerable process, effectively granting full control over the affected system. The proximity aspect suggests that physical access to the network segment may facilitate exploitation, but logical remote vectors remain viable if the service is exposed beyond local boundaries.
This vulnerability aligns with Common Weakness Enumeration category CWE-122, which describes heap-based buffer overflow conditions where data written exceeds the allocated size of a heap object. The attack vector corresponds to ATT&CK technique T1059, specifically command and script interpreters or direct code execution via memory corruption, as well as T1190 for exploitation of remote services. The lack of input validation is characteristic of CWE-20 Improper Input Validation, which serves as the root cause allowing the out-of-bounds write to occur without triggering exceptions or rejecting malformed inputs. Understanding these classifications helps in mapping the vulnerability to broader security frameworks and prioritizing remediation efforts based on industry-standard risk assessments.
Mitigation strategies must focus on rigorous input validation and memory safety practices within the affected code module. Developers should implement strict length checks before any copy operations, ensuring that the size of incoming data does not exceed the capacity of the destination buffer. Utilizing safe string handling functions or bounds-checking libraries can prevent accidental overflows during parsing routines. Additionally, enabling compiler-based protections such as stack canaries, Address Sanitizers (ASan), and Control Flow Integrity (CFI) can help detect or mitigate exploitation attempts in production environments until a permanent patch is deployed. Network-level defenses should also be considered, including ingress filtering to restrict access to the provisioning discovery service from untrusted sources and rate limiting to reduce the impact of automated fuzzing attacks aimed at triggering this flaw. Regular code audits focusing on memory management functions are essential to identify similar patterns in other parts of the peer-to-peer stack.