CVE-2026-58943 in Android
Summary
by MITRE • 11/02/2026
In run of AddAccountSettings.java, there is a possible background activity launch due to a confused deputy. This could lead to local escalation of privilege with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 11/02/2026
The vulnerability identified in the Android application component AddAccountSettings.java represents a classic instance of an insecure direct object reference or, more accurately given the context provided, a confused deputy problem that facilitates unauthorized background activity launches. In this scenario, the application fails to properly validate whether it has the authority to initiate specific intents for activities that are not explicitly exported but may still be accessible through implicit intent resolution mechanisms. This flaw allows an attacker who can execute arbitrary code within the same user context or potentially from a lower-privileged app to trick the vulnerable component into launching sensitive background services or activities without proper authentication checks. The core technical issue lies in the improper handling of intent filters and permission boundaries, where the application assumes that because it is initiating the action internally, no further security verification is required for target components that might have broader access capabilities than intended by the developer.
From a technical perspective, this vulnerability exploits the Android framework's implicit intent resolution process. When an app sends an implicit intent to start another activity or service, the system resolves which component should handle it based on action strings and data URIs rather than explicit class names. If AddAccountSettings.java constructs such intents without sufficiently restricting the target package name or verifying that the receiving component is secure and intended for internal use only, a malicious app can intercept this intent by registering its own activity with matching filters. This effectively bypasses any security controls meant to protect sensitive account settings operations. The confusion arises because the system treats the request as legitimate due to the originating context being trusted, even though the actual target component might be controlled or influenced by an untrusted party.
The operational impact of this vulnerability is significant, particularly regarding local privilege escalation and data confidentiality. Since user interaction is not required for exploitation, an attacker can automate the attack vector silently in the background. By leveraging this confused deputy flaw, a malicious application could trigger actions that modify account settings, exfiltrate sensitive credentials stored within those settings, or establish persistent backdoors by launching privileged services. This leads to a local escalation of privilege where the attacker gains capabilities beyond their original sandbox restrictions, potentially accessing private data belonging to other applications or system components. The lack of required user interaction makes this vulnerability particularly dangerous as it can be exploited without alerting the victim, allowing for prolonged undetected access and potential compromise of sensitive account information.
To mitigate this risk, developers must enforce strict component visibility controls by ensuring that all activities handling sensitive data are explicitly exported=false unless absolutely necessary. When implicit intents are used, they should always include explicit package names to prevent interception via intent resolution attacks. Additionally implementing signature-level permissions for internal components ensures that only apps signed with the same certificate can interact with them. It is also critical to validate incoming requests and avoid relying solely on the calling app's identity without verifying its actual privileges. Following industry standards such as CWE-269 Improper Privilege Management and CWE-749 Exposed Dangerous Method or API, along with ATT&CK techniques related to privilege escalation like T1055 Process Injection or T1088 Permission Modification, provides a structured approach to identifying and remediating these types of logic flaws. Regular security audits focusing on intent handling and permission boundaries are essential to prevent such confused deputy scenarios in future updates.