What is CVE-2026-20513?

CVE-2026-20513 is In Audio HAL, there is a possible information disclosure due to improper input validation. The supplied enrichment data classifies it as Info Disclosure mapped to CWE-35 CWE-35.

Which versions are affected?

Affected product and version evidence is listed in the product table above. Current public advisories should be checked for exact version scope before patch targeting is finalized.

Is there active exploitation?

Active exploitation is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-20513. If exploitation is not confirmed from current sources, teams should document that status and continue monitoring KEV, vendor, and telemetry updates.

No. CVE-2026-20513 is not listed in CISA KEV in the supplied enrichment data. KEV status should be monitored because it can change after initial disclosure or after exploitation becomes publicly confirmed.

Is there a public exploit?

2 public PoC repositories reported; 0 marked weaponized in current dataset. Public exploit or PoC availability should raise triage priority, especially for exposed or business-critical systems.

How can defenders detect it?

Start with Not reported where available. Look for vulnerability-class behavior, product errors, suspicious authentication events, exploit probes, and abnormal process activity based only on evidence that applies to the affected product.

How should teams prioritize it?

Prioritize CVE-2026-20513 using CVSS null, EPSS 0%, KEV status, public PoC status, and asset exposure. Internet-facing, privileged, or business-critical deployments should be handled first.

Are workarounds available?

The supplied mitigation guidance says to apply vendor patches and restrict external exposure until fixed. Fixed-version evidence is listed in the mitigation section above.

Which threat actors are linked publicly?

No public threat actor linkage is confirmed from current sources. Do not attribute exploitation to a threat actor unless the source evidence explicitly supports that linkage.

What should be done in the next 24 hours?

Identify exposed assets running affected vendor/product/version combinations. Prioritize based on EPSS, PoC availability, and external exposure. Search available logs for exploit probes, errors, authentication anomalies, or suspicious child processes matching the vulnerability class. Open remediation tickets with affected assets, owners, evidence status, and detection coverage so decisions are traceable.

Info Disclosurepublic exploit

CVE-2026-20513

CVE-2026-20513 — In Audio HAL, there is a possible information disclosure due to improper input validation

In Audio HAL, there is a possible information disclosure due to improper input validation. This could lead to local information disclosure if a malicious actor has already obtained the System privilege. User interaction is not needed for exploitation. Patch ID: ALPS11087533; Issue ID: MSV-8245.

Published Sep 7, 2026Updated Sep 7, 2026Sources: NVD, MediaTek, Inc. (CNA), GitHub, GitHub Security Advisory, SOCRadar CTI

Triage

Is it exploited, how likely is exploitation, what does it touch, and how severe do the scoring sources call it.

Exploitation

Exploit code

public exploit, none observed

EPSS

ahead of 0% of scored CVEs

Affects

MediaTek, Inc.

57 products listed

CVSS base

Unscored

no source published a base score

Remediation

The vendor's own words where we have them.

Upgrade MediaTek chipset to a fixed release. Apply vendor patches per advisory and restrict external exposure of the affected component until patched.

First 24 hours

Ordered from the record's own fields — exposure first, because you cannot patch what you have not found.

Identify exposed assets running affected vendor/product/version combinations.
Prioritize based on EPSS, PoC availability, and external exposure.
Search available logs for exploit probes, errors, authentication anomalies, or suspicious child processes matching the vulnerability class.

Affected scope

Vendor, product and version as the advisories word them.

Vendor	Product	Versions	Status
MediaTek, Inc.	MediaTek chipset	MT2718	Vulnerable
MediaTek, Inc.	MediaTek chipset	MT6769	Vulnerable
MediaTek, Inc.	MediaTek chipset	MT6781	Vulnerable
MediaTek, Inc.	MediaTek chipset	MT6789	Vulnerable
MediaTek, Inc.	MediaTek chipset	MT6833	Vulnerable
MediaTek, Inc.	MediaTek chipset	MT6835	Vulnerable
MediaTek, Inc.	MediaTek chipset	MT6853	Vulnerable
MediaTek, Inc.	MediaTek chipset	MT6855	Vulnerable
MediaTek, Inc.	MediaTek chipset	MT6858	Vulnerable
MediaTek, Inc.	MediaTek chipset	MT6877	Vulnerable
MediaTek, Inc.	MediaTek chipset	MT6878	Vulnerable
MediaTek, Inc.	MediaTek chipset	MT6881	Vulnerable

What this weakness leads to

MITRE's own consequences and mitigations for the weakness class — the authority's wording, not guidance derived from the CVSS vector.

MITRE

CWE-35 · Path Traversal: '.../...//'

Read Files or Directories
Modify Files or Directories::

Mitigation: Assume all input is malicious. Use an accept known good input validation strategy, i.e., use a list of acceptable inputs that strictly conform to specifications. Reject any input that does not strictly conform to specifications, or transform it into something that does. When performing input validation, consider all potentially relevant properties, including length, type of input, the full range of acceptable values, missing or extra inputs, syntax, consistency across related fields, and conformance to business rules. As an example of business rule logic, boat may be syntactically valid because it only contains alphanumeric characters, but it is not valid if the input is only expected to contain colors such as red or blue. Do not rely exclusively on looking for malicious or malformed inputs. This is likely to miss at least one undesirable input, especially if the code's environment changes. This can give attackers enough room to bypass the intended validation. However, denylists can be useful for detecting potential attacks or determining which inputs are so malformed that they should be rejected outright. When validating filenames, use stringent allowlists that limit the character set to be used. If feasible, only allow a single . character in the filename to avoid weaknesses such as CWE-23, and exclude directory separators such as / to avoid CWE-36. Use a list of allowable file extensions, which will help to avoid CWE-434. Do not rely exclusively on a filtering mechanism that removes potentially dangerous characters. This is equivalent to a denylist, which may be incomplete (CWE-184). For example, filtering / is insufficient protection if the filesystem also supports the use of as a directory separator. Another possible error could occur when the filtering is applied in a way that still produces dangerous data (CWE-182). For example, if ../ sequences are removed from the .../...// string in a sequential fashion, two instances of ../ would be removed from the original string, but the remaining characters would still form the ../ string.

Weakness & attack patterns

CWE-35

Inferred from the weakness class — not observed against this CVE.

CAPEC-116 · ExcavationCAPEC-118 · Collect and Analyze Information

Public exploit

Capability, not use: code existing is a different claim from anyone running it.

Repositories

Detection

Read off the CVSS vector and the weakness class. Starting points, not rules we have tested.

Monitor for scanner or exploit-pattern traffic after 2 public PoC repositories were reported.

Timeline

What happened to this CVE, newest first — with the readings a source repeats on a schedule counted underneath rather than listed.

2026
Initial · CVE published
Sep 7, 2026 · NVD
Added · GHSA-7fxg-vh63-qf9r published (unknown)
Sep 7, 2026 · GitHub Security Advisory
CVE published by MITRE.
Sep 7, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI

References

3 on the record

www.mediatek.com/product-security-bulletin/September-2026
Vendor Advisory
nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-20513
NVD
github.com/advisories/GHSA-7fxg-vh63-qf9r
Exploit, Third Party Advisory

Elsewhere on this site

MediaTek, Inc.every CVE for this vendor
Info Disclosuresame class
CWE-35other pages naming this weakness

Not in any source we poll

Listed rather than left blank: an empty field and an unmeasured one look identical on screen, and only one is a reason to look elsewhere.

No confirmed IOCs, IP addresses, domains, file hashes, or malware artifacts supplied.
No organization-specific asset inventory, compensating-control status, or patch deployment evidence supplied.
No exploit packet captures, log samples, or incident case IDs supplied.

Answered from this record1

What should defenders know first?

CVE-2026-20513 is In Audio HAL, there is a possible information disclosure due to improper input validation, a unscored vulnerability affecting MediaTek chipset from MediaTek, Inc.. The current evidence does not list it in CISA KEV, and the exploit status is: Active exploitation is not confirmed from current sources for CVE-2026-20513. Public exploit evidence is: 2 public PoC repositories reported; 0 marked weaponized in current dataset. The affected-version evidence is listed in the key facts and affected products tables. Defenders should first verify whether exposed or business-critical assets run those versions, then apply vendor patches or mitigations, restrict reachable attack surface, and preserve logs for detection review. CVSS null describes technical severity, while EPSS 0% helps estimate near-term exploit likelihood; neither replaces asset context. Unknown fields should remain explicit in tickets, and threat actor, IOC, victimology, or payload claims should not be added unless a cited source supports them. Monitor CISA KEV, vendor advisories, NVD changes, public PoC repositories, and internal telemetry for update triggers.