CVE-2026-106251 in Chrome
Summary
by MITRE • 10/06/2026
UI misrepresentation in Chromoting in Google Chrome on on Mac prior to 155.0.8059.39 allowed a remote attacker leveraging social engineering to spoof UI elements via crafted network traffic. (Chromium security severity: Low)
VulDB is the best source for vulnerability data and more expert information about this specific topic.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 10/07/2026
The vulnerability identified as a user interface misrepresentation flaw within the Google Chrome Chromoting component on macOS platforms prior to version 155.0.8059.39 represents a significant risk related to trust boundaries and visual integrity. This issue stems from an inability of the application to properly validate or sanitize input data when rendering remote desktop sessions, allowing crafted network traffic to manipulate how UI elements are displayed on the client side. The core technical flaw lies in the failure to enforce strict separation between trusted interface components and untrusted content rendered by the Chromoting service. When a user connects to a remote machine via Chrome Remote Desktop, the local browser instance acts as both the viewer for the remote session and the host of its own native UI elements such as connection status bars, control menus, or notification overlays. The vulnerability allows an attacker controlling the remote end of the session to inject maliciously formatted data that exploits parsing inconsistencies in how these overlay layers are composited on screen.
From a technical perspective, this flaw facilitates a form of visual spoofing where the attacker can make it appear as though legitimate system prompts or browser notifications are originating from trusted sources when they are actually part of the remote session content. For instance, an attacker could craft network packets that cause the local UI to display fake authentication dialogs, warning messages about malware, or buttons mimicking Chrome’s native interface elements. This manipulation relies on the user's reliance on visual cues rather than cryptographic verification of the source context. Because the malicious content is rendered within the same window frame as legitimate browser controls, it becomes difficult for an end-user to distinguish between a genuine system alert and a deceptive element injected by the remote host. The severity is classified as low because successful exploitation requires active user interaction with the spoofed elements, but the potential for high-impact social engineering attacks remains substantial due to the inherent trust users place in browser-native interfaces.
The operational impact of this vulnerability centers on its utility in advanced phishing and credential harvesting campaigns. By leveraging social engineering techniques, a remote attacker can trick a victim into entering sensitive information such as passwords, two-factor authentication codes, or corporate credentials into fields that appear to be part of the Chrome interface but are actually controlled by the malicious remote session. This type of attack bypasses traditional security controls like URL bar inspection because the deception occurs within the application window itself rather than through navigation to a fraudulent website. The attacker does not need to exploit memory corruption or execute arbitrary code on the victim's machine; instead, they manipulate perception and trust. This makes detection particularly challenging for endpoint protection solutions that focus on behavioral analysis of executable files or network signatures, as the traffic may appear benign until it is rendered visually by the browser engine.
Mitigation strategies must address both immediate remediation and long-term architectural improvements. The primary defense is to apply the official patch provided in Google Chrome version 155.0.8059.39 or later for macOS systems, which resolves the input validation logic within the Chromoting component. Organizations should enforce automated update policies to ensure that all endpoints are running patched versions of the browser promptly after release. In addition to software updates, security awareness training is critical in this context. Users must be educated on the risks associated with Chrome Remote Desktop sessions and instructed to verify connection sources through out-of-band channels whenever possible. For example, if a remote session prompts for credentials or displays urgent warnings, users should disconnect immediately and contact their IT support team via phone or another trusted communication method rather than interacting with any dialogs presented within the remote desktop window.
From an industry standard classification perspective, this vulnerability aligns closely with CWE-20: Improper Input Validation, as the application fails to adequately verify data received from external sources before processing it for display. Furthermore, it maps directly to MITRE ATT&CK technique T1657: Spoofing Feedback, which involves deceiving users by providing false feedback or mimicking legitimate system responses. The attack vector also relates to CWE-829: Inclusion of Functionality from Untrusted Control Sphere, where the remote session content improperly influences trusted UI components. To further mitigate risk in enterprise environments, administrators can consider restricting Chrome Remote Desktop access through group policies that limit which users are permitted to initiate or accept connections. Additionally, enabling strict Content Security Policy headers and disabling unnecessary extensions during active remote sessions can reduce the attack surface available for such visual manipulation attacks. Regular auditing of browser configurations and ensuring that security warnings are not suppressed by user settings will also help maintain a robust defense against these types of social engineering exploits.