Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-11034

Google Chrome ≤ 149.0.7827.53

Published
04 June 2026
Modified
23 July 2026
Patch / advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 6.1
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:L/I:L/A:N
EPSS Score 0.0018 8th percentile
Risk Priority 35 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2026-11034 is a medium-severity Improper Input Validation (CWE-20) vulnerability in Google Chrome. Its CVSS base score is 6.1 (Medium).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Exploitation for Client Execution (T1203); ranked at the 8th 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 SI-10 (Information Input Validation) and SI-15 (Information Output Filtering) — see the control section below for these in your framework.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Insufficient validation of untrusted input in Tab Group Sync in Google Chrome on Android prior to 149.0.7827.53 allowed a remote attacker to inject arbitrary scripts or HTML (UXSS) via malicious network traffic. (Chromium security severity: Medium)

CWE(s)

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise TechniquesAI

T1203 Exploitation for Client Execution Execution
Adversaries may exploit software vulnerabilities in client applications to execute code.
Why these techniques?

UXSS via untrusted network input directly enables client-side script execution through browser exploitation.

Confidence: HIGH · MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise v19.0

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-11029Same product: Google Android
CVE-2026-7915Same product: Google Android
CVE-2026-9977Same product: Google Android
CVE-2026-13929Same product: Google Android
CVE-2026-15778Same product: Google Chrome
CVE-2026-7905Same product: Google Android
CVE-2025-12908Same product: Google Android
CVE-2026-13995Same product: Google Android
CVE-2026-14428Same product: Google Android
CVE-2026-13872Same product: Google Android

Affected Assets

google
chrome
≤ 149.0.7827.53

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)
  • SI-10 Information Input Validation
  • SI-15 Information Output Filtering
  • SI-3 Malicious Code Protection
Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)
  • SI-3 Malicious Code Protection
Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)
  • 6 hardening rules · 3 OS baselines
Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)

Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI

prevent

Directly requires validation of untrusted input, which is the root cause of the UXSS injection via Tab Group Sync network traffic.

prevent

Provides output filtering that can block or sanitize injected scripts/HTML before rendering in the browser UI.

preventdetect

Malicious code protection mechanisms can inspect and block script injection attempts arriving over network sync channels.

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 require and enforce input validation during development.

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.

detects

Testing against a defined set of requirements and using code review plus vulnerability scanning forces validation of inputs and handling of unanticipated conditions, reducing the chance that malformed data will be accepted.

prevents

Secure-coding guidelines and mandatory security testing (including code scans) compel developers to validate and sanitize inputs at design and implementation time, lowering the incidence of malformed or malicious data reaching downstream components.

prevents

Mandating input controls that include integrity checks and input validation ensures that untrusted data is examined before use, blocking the root cause of many injection and malformed-data weaknesses.

prevents

Security-by-design principles explicitly call for data validation and sanitization at every layer, reducing the chance that malformed or malicious input will be processed without scrutiny.

prevents

Requiring language-specific secure coding standards, peer review, SAST and documented mitigation of common programming errors forces validation of all inputs before they are trusted.

none

Regular automated validation of system software and data content, combined with scanning of all inbound files, enforces input validation at the boundary before untrusted content is processed.

References