Google: Android patch gap makes n-days as dangerous as zero-days

Gandalf_The_Grey

Level 76
Thread author
Verified
Honorary Member
Top Poster
Content Creator
Well-known
Apr 24, 2016
6,603
Google has published its annual 0-day vulnerability report, presenting in-the-wild exploitation stats from 2022 and highlighting a long-standing problem in the Android platform that elevates the value and use of disclosed flaws for extended periods.

More specifically, Google's report highlights the problem of n-days in Android functioning as 0-days for threat actors.

The problem stems from the complexity of the Android ecosystem, involving several steps between the upstream vendor (Google) and the downstream manufacturer (phone manufacturers), significant discrepancies in security update intervals between different device models, short support periods, responsibility mixups, and others issues.

A zero-day vulnerability is a software flaw known before a vendor becomes aware or fixes it, allowing it to be exploited in attacks before a patch is available. However, an n-day vulnerability is one that is publicly known with or without a patch.

For example, if a bug is known in Android before Google, it is called a zero-day. However, once Google learns about it, it becomes an n-day, with the n reflecting the number of days since it became publicly known.

Google warns that attackers can use n-days to attack unpatched devices for months, using known exploitation methods or devising their own, despite a patch already being made available by Google or another vendor.

This is caused by patch gaps, where Google or another vendor fixes a bug, but it takes months for a device manufacturer to roll it out in their own versions of Android.

"These gaps between upstream vendors and downstream manufacturers allow n-days - vulnerabilities that are publicly known - to function as 0-days because no patch is readily available to the user and their only defense is to stop using the device," explains Google's report.

"While these gaps exist in most upstream/downstream relationships, they are more prevalent and longer in Android."
 

oldschool

Level 82
Verified
Top Poster
Well-known
Mar 29, 2018
7,117
The problem stems from the complexity of the Android ecosystem, involving several steps between the upstream vendor (Google) and the downstream manufacturer (phone manufacturers), significant discrepancies in security update intervals between different device models, short support periods, responsibility mixups, and others issues.
I always assumed this was the case since the phone mfr is the variable factor in issuing updates, in my case with an older cheapo Samsung version.
 
F

ForgottenSeer 97327

recyvcle it or use it as your offline notepad.
Blackbook of passwords?

Yep, safer to use Apple phones or vanilla Android. My smartphones last on average four years. When buying mainstream, the length and interval of maintenance relates to the sales success of a specific model. I have a Samsung A53 while my wife has a A54. We usually buy same models, but not at the same time. In the past we have noticed that a sales success kept on getting three and six month updates, while the less successful successor only got six months and yearly updates.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: piquiteco

About us

  • MalwareTips is a community-driven platform providing the latest information and resources on malware and cyber threats. Our team of experienced professionals and passionate volunteers work to keep the internet safe and secure. We provide accurate, up-to-date information and strive to build a strong and supportive community dedicated to cybersecurity.

User Menu

Follow us

Follow us on Facebook or Twitter to know first about the latest cybersecurity incidents and malware threats.

Top