Cyber Resilience

CVE-2024-1694

Google Updater ≤ 1.3.36.351

Public PoC
Published
07 June 2024
Modified
14 March 2025
CVSS Score v3.1 7.8
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0015 5th percentile
Risk Priority 54 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2024-1694 is a high-severity Use of Function with Inconsistent Implementations (CWE-474) vulnerability in Google Updater. Its CVSS base score is 7.8 (High).

Operationally, ranked at the 5th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog; a public proof-of-concept is referenced.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SA-11 (Developer Testing and Evaluation) and SA-15 (Development Process, Standards, and Tools) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Inappropriate implementation in Google Updator prior to 1.3.36.351 in Google Chrome allowed a local attacker to bypass discretionary access control via a malicious file. (Chromium security severity: High)

CWE(s)
NVD-CWE-noinfoCWE-474

Related Threats

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-14402Same product: Microsoft Windows
CVE-2026-8563Same product: Microsoft Windows
CVE-2026-8547Same product: Microsoft Windows
CVE-2026-9907Same product: Microsoft Windows
CVE-2026-9991Same product: Microsoft Windows
CVE-2025-4609Same product: Microsoft Windows
CVE-2026-10940Same product: Microsoft Windows
CVE-2025-12726Same product: Microsoft Windows
CVE-2026-11641Same product: Microsoft Windows
CVE-2026-7917Same product: Microsoft Windows

Affected Assets

google
updater
≤ 1.3.36.351

Mitigating Controls

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

SA-11 Developer Testing and Evaluation good match

Developer testing across OS versions can reveal behavioral differences caused by the inconsistent function.

SA-15 Development Process, Standards, and Tools partial match

Documented development standards and tools can prohibit or replace functions known to have inconsistent implementations.

SA-8 Security and Privacy Engineering Principles partial match

Engineering principles can require use of portable, consistently implemented functions across platforms.

Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly enforce coding standards and portability reviews that avoid functions with inconsistent behavior across platforms.

Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

A.8.29 Security testing in development and acceptance mostly match
finds

Security testing can surface cross-platform inconsistencies but does not prevent their introduction in code.

A.8.25 Secure development life cycle partial match
prevents

Secure SDLC requires consistent API selection and platform abstraction, reducing use of inconsistently implemented functions.

A.8.27 Secure system architecture and engineering principles partial match
degrades

Secure architecture principles include portable abstractions and avoiding platform-specific calls with divergent behavior.

A.8.28 Secure coding partial match
prevents

Secure coding standards explicitly prohibit or wrap functions known to behave differently across OSes and versions.

References