CVE-2026-79058 in Chrome
Summary
by MITRE • 08/26/2026
Missing authorization in Passwords in Google Chrome prior to 152.0.7977.65 allowed a remote attacker who had compromised the renderer process to spoof UI elements via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Low)
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 08/26/2026
The vulnerability identified as missing authorization within the password management subsystem of Google Chrome prior to version 152.0.7977.65 represents a significant flaw in the browser's process isolation model, specifically concerning how user interface elements are rendered and authenticated relative to their underlying data sources. This issue stems from an insufficient verification mechanism that fails to properly distinguish between legitimate UI components generated by trusted browser processes and those injected or manipulated by untrusted contexts. In modern web browsers like Chrome, a strict sandboxing architecture is employed where renderer processes handle the execution of web content in isolation from sensitive operations such as password storage and autofill functionality. The intended security boundary relies on these renderers having no direct authority to modify privileged UI elements that interact with stored credentials or authentication states without explicit authorization checks performed by higher-privilege browser processes.
When this authorization check is missing, a remote attacker who has successfully compromised the renderer process through other vectors such as cross-site scripting or exploitation of another vulnerability can exploit this gap to spoof user interface elements. By crafting a specific HTML page that leverages internal APIs or DOM manipulation techniques not properly gated by permission checks, the attacker can inject deceptive UI components into the browsing context. These spoofed elements are designed to mimic legitimate browser prompts, such as password save dialogs, autofill suggestions, or login verification screens. The visual fidelity of these injected elements is often high enough to deceive users because they inherit the styling and layout properties of the genuine interface, making it difficult for an end-user to distinguish between a real system prompt and a malicious fabrication created by the compromised renderer process.
The operational impact of this vulnerability centers on social engineering attacks facilitated by technical deception rather than direct data exfiltration through network channels. An attacker leveraging this flaw can trick users into entering sensitive information, such as master passwords for password managers or two-factor authentication codes, directly into fields controlled by the malicious page under the guise that they are interacting with a trusted browser feature. This undermines the trust model of the application and compromises the confidentiality of credentials even if the underlying storage mechanism remains secure. The severity is classified as low within Chromium's security framework because it requires prior compromise of the renderer process, which itself is considered a difficult attack vector to achieve independently without exploiting other vulnerabilities first. However, in scenarios where an attacker has already gained foothold via phishing or drive-by downloads, this flaw significantly lowers the barrier for credential theft and session hijacking.
Mitigation strategies primarily involve updating Google Chrome to version 152.0.7977.65 or later, which includes patches that enforce strict authorization checks on UI element creation within password-related contexts. Security engineers should also ensure that browser policies are configured to restrict the capabilities of renderer processes where possible and monitor for anomalous behavior in user input patterns that might indicate spoofing attempts. From a broader security architecture perspective, this vulnerability highlights the importance of maintaining robust separation between untrusted web content and privileged UI rendering logic. Industry standards such as CWE-269 Improper Privilege Management are directly relevant here, as the core issue is the failure to enforce least privilege principles when allowing renderer processes to interact with sensitive interface components. Additionally, ATT&CK technique T1078 Valid Accounts can be contextualized by noting that this flaw aids attackers in harvesting valid credentials through deception rather than brute force or network sniffing. Organizations should prioritize patch management cycles and educate users on verifying the authenticity of browser prompts before entering sensitive data, especially when interacting with pages from untrusted sources.