Live Active security incident? Get immediate response
MITRE ATT&CK® Analytic

AN1750: Analytic 1750

Application vetting services could look for use of standard APIs (e.g. the clipboard API) that could indicate data manipulation is occurring.

MobileAN1750AnalyticObject v1.0 Modified
Glexia's Take

Analyst context for executives and security teams

Analyst confidence Medium

This analytic is about using Android application vetting to identify apps that call standard APIs, such as the clipboard API, in ways that may indicate data manipulation. For leaders, the value is not that API use is automatically malicious, but that mobile app risk often depends on whether the organization can review app behavior before deployment or approval.

Executive priority

Prioritize this as a mobile application governance and assurance question: do approved Android apps undergo vetting that can identify sensitive API use, and is there a process to decide whether that use is legitimate for the business purpose of the app? This supports mobile risk management, compliance evidence, and incident readiness where Android devices or managed app stores are in scope.

Technical view

SOC, mobile security, and app security teams should validate whether Android application vetting tools or processes capture use of standard APIs such as clipboard access. Because no ATT&CK tactic, relationship context, or official detection logic is supplied, this should be treated as a review signal rather than a standalone detection. Analysts should compare API use against expected app functionality and approved data-handling behavior.

Likely telemetry

  • Android application vetting results
  • Static or dynamic analysis findings for API usage
  • Mobile application inventory and approval records
  • Evidence of clipboard API references or behavior in reviewed apps
  • App risk review decisions and exception records

Detection direction

  • Confirm whether application vetting covers Android apps and reports standard API usage such as clipboard access.
  • Tune review criteria so common legitimate API use does not create excessive false positives.
  • Correlate API-use findings with app purpose, requested permissions, and data-handling expectations before escalating.
  • Document gaps where apps are installed outside vetted channels or where vetting does not inspect API behavior.

Mitigation priorities

  • Establish or validate a mobile app vetting process for Android applications.
  • Require review of sensitive or data-manipulating API use before app approval where feasible.
  • Maintain an approved application inventory and exception process.
  • Use findings as compliance and risk evidence rather than assuming API use alone proves malicious behavior.
Analyst notes and limits

The supplied ATT&CK object is a detection analytic in the mobile domain for Android. It provides a short description focused on application vetting and standard API use, with clipboard API as an example. No official detection procedure, tactics, or relationships were supplied, so local mobile management and app review context is essential.

This take is limited to the official fields provided. It does not establish adversary use, active exploitation, impact, attribution, or guaranteed detection coverage. API use alone is not sufficient to determine malicious activity without local context.

Official MITRE ATT&CK definition

Analytic 1750

Application vetting services could look for use of standard APIs (e.g. the clipboard API) that could indicate data manipulation is occurring.

View the same entry on attack.mitre.org (MITRE-hosted reference; in-page links above use the Glexia ATT&CK library.)

Glexia analysis

How security teams should use this page

Treat this object as behavior context, not an attribution claim. Validate the related groups, software, data sources, and mitigations against official ATT&CK relationships and your own telemetry before making control-coverage decisions.

Relationship explorer

All related ATT&CK context

No relationships are available in the current normalized data for this object.

Change history

Object version and sync metadata

The fields below describe the current mirrored snapshot. When Glexia retains multiple ATT&CK source imports, you can open the table to compare the same object across releases (hashes and MITRE timestamps). For MITRE’s own release notes and roadmap, see ATT&CK resources — Updates .

ATT&CK release
19.1
Object version
1.0
Created
Modified
Raw hash
b73bc6b52ce11e73...
Imported snapshots across ATT&CK releases (1)
Release Bundle imported Object version Modified Status Raw hash
19.1 1.0 Current bundle b73bc6b52ce1…
Raw source

Mirrored ATT&CK source object

The raw object is retained through the mirrored ATT&CK source bundle and object hash. The raw endpoint returns the exact object from the mirrored bundle when available.

Source references

External references and citations

MITRE external references are preserved separately from Glexia analysis so citations remain traceable to their original source records.

  1. [1]
    mitre-attack AN1750
    Open source URL
Source and licensing

Source: MITRE ATT&CK®. © 2026 The MITRE Corporation. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of The MITRE Corporation. MITRE ATT&CK and ATT&CK are registered trademarks of The MITRE Corporation. Glexia is not affiliated with or endorsed by MITRE.