Cyber Resilience

CVE-2026-11102

Google Chrome ≤ 149.0.7827.53

Published
04 June 2026
Modified
17 June 2026
CVSS Score v3.1 8.8
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0039 32th percentile
Risk Priority 64 floored blend · peak EPSS

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 32th 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

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)
NVD-CWE-noinfoCWE-474

Related Threats

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2024-7001Same product: Google Chrome
CVE-2025-0291Same product: Google Chrome
CVE-2026-2648Same product: Google Chrome
CVE-2026-15132Same product: Google Chrome
CVE-2026-17675Same product: Google Chrome
CVE-2026-13965Same product: Google Chrome
CVE-2025-4096Same product: Google Chrome
CVE-2026-13988Same product: Google Chrome
CVE-2026-17774Same product: Google Chrome
CVE-2026-15131Same product: Google Chrome

Affected Assets

google
chrome
≤ 149.0.7827.53

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