What is CVE-2026-20535?

CVE-2026-20535 is In aidl, there is a possible escalation of privilege due to a missing permission check. The supplied enrichment data classifies it as Access Control mapped to CWE-862 CWE-862.

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?

Exploitation is reported, but no independent confirmation is available in the sources we have. If exploitation is not confirmed from current sources, teams should document that status and continue monitoring KEV, vendor, and telemetry updates.

No. CVE-2026-20535 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?

8 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-2026-20535 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.

Access Controlpublic exploit

CVE-2026-20535

CVE-2026-20535 — In aidl, there is a possible escalation of privilege due to a missing permission check

In aidl, there is a possible escalation of privilege due to a missing permission check. 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: ALPS11185216; Issue ID: MSV-9039.

Published Oct 5, 2026Updated Oct 5, 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

Reported

not confirmed by CISA

EPSS

ahead of 0% of scored CVEs

Affects

MediaTek, Inc.

12 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	MT6878	Vulnerable
MediaTek, Inc.	MediaTek chipset	MT6881	Vulnerable
MediaTek, Inc.	MediaTek chipset	MT6899	Vulnerable
MediaTek, Inc.	MediaTek chipset	MT6989	Vulnerable
MediaTek, Inc.	MediaTek chipset	MT6991	Vulnerable
MediaTek, Inc.	MediaTek chipset	MT6993	Vulnerable
MediaTek, Inc.	MediaTek chipset	MT8188	Vulnerable
MediaTek, Inc.	MediaTek chipset	MT8189	Vulnerable
MediaTek, Inc.	MediaTek chipset	MT8668	Vulnerable
MediaTek, Inc.	MediaTek chipset	MT8781	Vulnerable
MediaTek, Inc.	MediaTek chipset	MT8793	Vulnerable
MediaTek, Inc.	MediaTek chipset	MT8910	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-862 · Missing Authorization

Read Application Data
Read Files or Directories
Modify Application Data
Modify Files or Directories

Mitigation: Divide the software into anonymous, normal, privileged, and administrative areas. Reduce the attack surface by carefully mapping roles with data and functionality. Use role-based access control (RBAC) [REF-229] to enforce the roles at the appropriate boundaries. Note that this approach may not protect against horizontal authorization, i.e., it will not protect a user from attacking others with the same role.

Weakness & attack patterns

CWE-862

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

CAPEC-1 · Accessing Functionality Not Properly Constrained by ACLsCAPEC-122 · Privilege Abuse

T1211Exploitation for Defensive Evasion
T1542.002Pre-OS Boot: Component Firmware
T1556Modify Authentication Process

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 8 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
Oct 5, 2026 · NVD
Added · GHSA-8mmg-g9gw-84mh published (unknown)
Oct 5, 2026 · GitHub Security Advisory
CVE published by NIST.
Oct 5, 2026 · SOCRadar CTI

References

3 on the record

www.mediatek.com/product-security-bulletin/October-2026
Vendor Advisory
nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2026-20535
NVD
github.com/advisories/GHSA-8mmg-g9gw-84mh
Exploit, Third Party Advisory

Elsewhere on this site

MediaTek, Inc.every CVE for this vendor
Access Controlsame class
CWE-862other 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-2026-20535 is In aidl, there is a possible escalation of privilege due to a missing permission check, a unscored vulnerability affecting MediaTek chipset from MediaTek, Inc.. The current evidence does not list it in CISA KEV, and the exploit status is: Exploitation is reported, but no independent confirmation is available in the sources we have. Public exploit evidence is: 8 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.