AN1831: Analytic 1831
Application vetting services could look for usage of the `READ_PRIVILEGED_PHONE_STATE` Android permission. This could indicate that non-system apps are attempting to access information that they do not have access to.
Analyst context for executives and security teams
This analytic is about checking Android applications for use of the READ_PRIVILEGED_PHONE_STATE permission. For security leaders, the practical value is mobile application governance: a non-system app requesting privileged phone-state access may indicate an application is attempting to reach device or subscriber information it should not be able to access. This matters for organizations that approve, distribute, or monitor Android apps used by employees or managed devices.
Executive priority
Prioritize this as a mobile risk and application-vetting control rather than as a confirmed incident indicator. Leaders should ask whether Android apps entering the environment are reviewed for privileged permission requests, whether exceptions are documented, and whether mobile security evidence can support audit, privacy, and incident response decisions. The business decision is whether app approval processes can identify risky permission usage before deployment to users or managed devices.
Technical view
For SOC, mobile security, and detection engineering teams, validate whether application-vetting workflows inspect Android application manifests or equivalent app metadata for READ_PRIVILEGED_PHONE_STATE. Because ATT&CK does not provide a detection procedure for this analytic, teams should treat it as a validation requirement: confirm where app permission data is collected, how non-system apps are distinguished from system apps, and how findings are triaged before generating alerts or blocking decisions.
Likely telemetry
- Android application manifest or package metadata showing requested permissions
- Mobile application vetting or app reputation service results
- Enterprise mobility management or mobile device management app inventory
- Approved application catalog records and exception documentation
- Mobile security review findings for Android applications
Detection direction
- Check whether Android app vetting can identify requests for READ_PRIVILEGED_PHONE_STATE.
- Tune review logic to focus on non-system apps, since the supplied ATT&CK description specifically notes concern when non-system apps attempt privileged access.
- Avoid treating the permission alone as proof of malicious activity; use it as a risk signal requiring app provenance, business justification, and deployment context.
- Validate blind spots such as apps installed outside managed catalogs, unmanaged Android devices, or vetting tools that do not parse requested permissions.
- Document analyst handling criteria because no official ATT&CK detection text is provided for this analytic.
Mitigation priorities
- Establish or reinforce Android application vetting before apps are approved for enterprise use.
- Require justification and approval for apps requesting privileged or sensitive permissions, especially READ_PRIVILEGED_PHONE_STATE.
- Maintain an inventory of approved Android apps and requested permissions for audit and incident response use.
- Use mobile management controls where available to restrict installation to vetted applications.
- Review exceptions periodically to ensure privileged permission requests remain necessary and authorized.
Analyst notes and limits
This ATT&CK object is a mobile detection analytic for Android application vetting. Its only explicit behavior is looking for use of the READ_PRIVILEGED_PHONE_STATE Android permission, particularly by non-system apps. No tactics, relationships, aliases, or official detection logic were supplied, so the take is framed around defensive validation and governance rather than threat attribution or incident confirmation.
The source object provides a short description and no official detection procedure, relationships, tactics, or examples. Local environment data is required to determine whether an app is system or non-system, whether the permission request is expected, and whether mobile app vetting coverage is complete.
Analytic 1831
Application vetting services could look for usage of the `READ_PRIVILEGED_PHONE_STATE` Android permission. This could indicate that non-system apps are attempting to access information that they do not have access to.
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.
All related ATT&CK context
No relationships are available in the current normalized data for this object.
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 .
Imported snapshots across ATT&CK releases (1)
| Release | Bundle imported | Object version | Modified | Status | Raw hash |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19.1 | 1.0 | Current bundle | dad7a27c4230… |
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.
External references and citations
MITRE external references are preserved separately from Glexia analysis so citations remain traceable to their original source records.
-
[1]
mitre-attack AN1831Open source URL
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.