Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-11019

Auth Bypass in Google Chrome ≤ 149.0.7827.53

Published
04 June 2026
Modified
22 July 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 6.5
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N
EPSS Score 0.0026 18th percentile
Risk Priority 35 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2026-11019 is a medium-severity Authentication Bypass by Spoofing (CWE-290) vulnerability in Google Chrome. Its CVSS base score is 6.5 (Medium).

Operationally, ranked at the 18th percentile by exploit likelihood (below the median); it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

The strongest mitigations our analysis identified map to SC-39 (Process Isolation) and SC-23 (Session Authenticity) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Inappropriate implementation in Payments in Google Chrome on Android prior to 149.0.7827.53 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to perform domain spoofing via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium)

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI

Insufficient information to map techniques.
Confidence: LOW · MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise v19.0

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2025-12729Same product: Google Android
CVE-2023-0130Same product: Google Android
CVE-2025-11209Same product: Google Android
CVE-2026-11175Same product: Google Android
CVE-2026-10984Same product: Google Android
CVE-2026-13987Same product: Google Android
CVE-2026-13997Same product: Google Android
CVE-2026-14129Same product: Google Android
CVE-2025-1922Same product: Google Android
CVE-2026-11172Same product: Google Android

Affected Assets

google
chrome
≤ 149.0.7827.53

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)
  • SC-39 Process Isolation
  • SC-23 Session Authenticity
  • SI-10 Information Input Validation
Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)
  • 3 hardening rules · 3 OS baselines
Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V6.4.3
  • V10.4.16
  • V10.5.1
  • V11.4.3

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

prevent

Process isolation between Chrome's renderer and browser processes directly limits the ability of a compromised renderer to perform domain spoofing in the Payments UI.

prevent

Session authenticity protections help ensure that domain/payment context cannot be misrepresented even when a renderer is under attacker control.

prevent

Strict input validation on HTML/payment flows can block crafted pages from achieving UI misrepresentation or domain spoofing.

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.AA-04 full match
prevents

Protecting, conveying, and verifying identity assertions specifically prevents the spoofing that enables authentication bypass.

PR.AA-03 mostly match
prevents

Requiring authentication of users/services/hardware directly counters spoofing-based bypass when strong methods are used.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly address design and implementation of accurate, non-spoofable UI elements.

PR.AA-02 partial match
prevents

Proofing and binding identities reduces spoofing opportunities during enrollment but does not address runtime authentication implementation flaws.

PR.AT-01 partial match
prevents

User awareness training helps people recognize and avoid harm from UI misrepresentation such as phishing, but does not prevent the flaw itself.

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.

degrades

Secure authentication control directly mitigates authentication bypass by spoofing.

degrades

Authentication information management directly addresses credential handling that prevents spoofing.

detects

Security testing can detect spoofing vulnerabilities but does not prevent them by itself.

prevents

Access control policy reduces spoofing opportunities but does not prescribe authentication mechanisms.

prevents

Identity management supports unique identities but does not guarantee resistance to spoofing.

prevents

Access rights assignment limits exposure but does not enforce authentication strength.

References