Which versions of Android XR are affected by CVE-2026-0072?

Android XR devices in production are vulnerable to complete system compromise via a critical privilege escalation flaw that allows any installed application to gain elevated permissions without user…

How to fix or mitigate CVE-2026-0072?

Within 24 hours: Inventory Android XR deployments, restrict app installations via mobile device management, and implement activity monitoring on InputMethodManagerService. Within 7 days: Verify Android XR security bulletin updates and establish patch readiness procedures. Within 30 days: Deploy vendor patch upon release and conduct security assessment of all deployed devices.

Android XR CVE-2026-0072

Q: What is the CVSS score of CVE-2026-0072?

CVE-2026-0072 has a CVSS 4.0 base score of 10.0 (Critical). CVSS vector: CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X. EPSS exploitation probability: 0.0%.

EUVD-2026-33728 CRITICAL

Improper Authorization (CWE-285)

2026-06-01 google_android

GHSA-q4x3-4f53-mg6q

Authentication Bypass Privilege Escalation Google Android Xr

10.0

CVSS 4.0 · Vendor: google_android

Severity by source

Vendor (google_android) PRIMARY

10.0 CRITICAL

CVSS:4.0/AV:N/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X

Primary rating from Vendor (google_android) · only source for this CVE.

CVSS VectorVendor: google_android

Attack Vector

Network

Attack Complexity

Low

Privileges Required

None

User Interaction

None

Scope

Lifecycle Timeline

Analysis Generated

Jun 01, 2026 - 19:38 vuln.today

CVSS changed

Jun 01, 2026 - 19:22 NVD

10.0 (CRITICAL)

CVE Published

Jun 01, 2026 - 17:38 nvd

CRITICAL 10.0

DescriptionCVE.org

In addInputMethodListener of com.android.server.inputmethod.InputMethodManagerService, there is a missing permission check. This could lead to local escalation of privilege with no additional execution privileges needed. User interaction is not needed for exploitation.

AnalysisAI

Local privilege escalation in Google Android XR stems from a missing permission check in InputMethodManagerService.addInputMethodListener, allowing an app or local context to register input method listeners without the authorization the IME subsystem normally requires. The flaw needs no user interaction and no additional execution privileges, and is addressed in the June 2026 Android XR security bulletin; no public exploit identified at time of analysis.

Technical ContextAI

InputMethodManagerService (IMMS) is the privileged system_server component that brokers all input method editor (IME) registrations, switches, and lifecycle callbacks for Android, including the Android XR variant used on Google's extended-reality platform. The addInputMethodListener entry point should be gated by an IME-management permission (typically INTERACT_ACROSS_USERS_FULL or a WRITE_SECURE_SETTINGS-equivalent), but per CWE-285 (Improper Authorization) that check is missing, so any local caller can subscribe to or influence IME state changes that should be restricted to system or IME-holder UIDs. Because IMMS runs inside system_server, abusing its callbacks gives a low-privileged app an observation or manipulation surface against a highly privileged process.

RemediationAI

Patch available per vendor advisory: install the 2026-06-01 (or later) Android XR security patch level documented at https://source.android.com/docs/security/bulletin/xr/2026/2026-06-01, which adds the missing permission check on InputMethodManagerService.addInputMethodListener. Until devices receive the OTA, compensating controls are limited because the bug is reachable by any locally installed app, so restrict app installation to vetted sources (disable sideloading and unknown-sources installs), enforce MDM policies that block untrusted APKs, and monitor for apps requesting unusual IME or accessibility-adjacent capabilities; these controls reduce the local attacker population but do not close the underlying authorization gap.