CVE-2026-11102
Google Chrome ≤ 149.0.7827.53
Raw vector
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HCVSS and EPSS are reproduced from their sources (NVD, FIRST EPSS). Risk Priority is our own derived reading, not an NVD score.
Summary
CVE-2026-11102 is a high-severity Use of Function with Inconsistent Implementations (CWE-474) vulnerability in Google Chrome. Its CVSS base score is 8.8 (High).
Operationally, ranked at the 31th 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 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
- 🇪🇺 ENISA EUVD: EUVD-2026-34563
Vulnerability Data
Inappropriate implementation in Isolated Web Apps in Google Chrome prior to 149.0.7827.53 allowed a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code inside a sandbox via a malicious file. (Chromium security severity: Medium)
- CWE(s)
Related Threats
CVEs Like This One
Affected Assets
Mitigating Controls
Mitigating Controls (NIST 800-53 r5) AI
Developer testing across OS versions can reveal behavioral differences caused by the inconsistent function.
Documented development standards and tools can prohibit or replace functions known to have inconsistent implementations.
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.
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.
Secure SDLC requires consistent API selection and platform abstraction, reducing use of inconsistently implemented functions.
Secure architecture principles include portable abstractions and avoiding platform-specific calls with divergent behavior.
Secure coding standards explicitly prohibit or wrap functions known to behave differently across OSes and versions.
Security testing can surface cross-platform inconsistencies but does not prevent their introduction in code.