hangwin mcp-chrome-bridge up to 1.0.31 Native-Server HTTP API cross-domain policy
| CVSS Meta Temp Score | Current Exploit Price (≈) | CTI Interest Score |
|---|---|---|
| 5.5 | $0-$5k | 1.18- |
Summary
A vulnerability classified as problematic has been found in hangwin mcp-chrome-bridge up to 1.0.31. The impacted element is an unknown function of the component Native-Server HTTP API. This manipulation causes cross-domain policy. This vulnerability is handled as CVE-2026-102878. The attack can be initiated remotely. There is not any exploit available.
Details
A vulnerability has been found in hangwin mcp-chrome-bridge up to 1.0.31 and classified as problematic. Affected by this vulnerability is some unknown processing of the component Native-Server HTTP API. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a cross-domain policy vulnerability. The CWE definition for the vulnerability is CWE-942. The product uses a cross-domain policy file that includes domains that should not be trusted. As an impact it is known to affect confidentiality. The summary by CVE is:
mcp-chrome-bridge through 1.0.31 contains an origin validation error in the native-server HTTP API that allows attackers to bypass CORS restrictions. Attackers can craft malicious web pages that make cross-origin requests to the local server and invoke browser automation tools including script execution, page content reading, and screenshot capture.
The advisory is shared at github.com. This vulnerability is known as CVE-2026-102878 since 09/29/2026. The exploitation appears to be difficult. The attack can be launched remotely. The exploitation doesn't need any form of authentication. It demands that the victim is doing some kind of user interaction. Neither technical details nor an exploit are publicly available. The price for an exploit might be around USD $0-$5k at the moment (estimation calculated on 09/29/2026).
There is no information about possible countermeasures known. It may be suggested to replace the affected object with an alternative product.
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
Product
Type
Vendor
Name
Version
- 1.0.0
- 1.0.1
- 1.0.2
- 1.0.3
- 1.0.4
- 1.0.5
- 1.0.6
- 1.0.7
- 1.0.8
- 1.0.9
- 1.0.10
- 1.0.11
- 1.0.12
- 1.0.13
- 1.0.14
- 1.0.15
- 1.0.16
- 1.0.17
- 1.0.18
- 1.0.19
- 1.0.20
- 1.0.21
- 1.0.22
- 1.0.23
- 1.0.24
- 1.0.25
- 1.0.26
- 1.0.27
- 1.0.28
- 1.0.29
- 1.0.30
- 1.0.31
CPE 2.3
CPE 2.2
CVSSv4
VulDB Vector: 🔒VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CNA CVSS-B Score: 🔒
CNA CVSS-BT Score: 🔒
CNA Vector: 🔒
CVSSv3
VulDB Meta Base Score: 5.6VulDB Meta Temp Score: 5.5
VulDB Base Score: 3.1
VulDB Temp Score: 3.0
VulDB Vector: 🔒
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
CNA Base Score: 8.1
CNA Vector (VulnCheck): 🔒
CVSSv2
| AV | AC | Au | C | I | A |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 | 💳 |
| Vector | Complexity | Authentication | Confidentiality | Integrity | Availability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
| Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
VulDB Base Score: 🔒
VulDB Temp Score: 🔒
VulDB Reliability: 🔍
Exploiting
Class: Cross-domain policyCWE: CWE-942 / CWE-346 / CWE-345
CAPEC: 🔒
ATT&CK: 🔒
Physical: No
Local: No
Remote: Yes
Availability: 🔒
Status: Not defined
Price Prediction: 🔍
Current Price Estimation: 🔒
| 0-Day | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Today | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock | Unlock |
Threat Intelligence
Interest: 🔍Active Actors: 🔍
Active APT Groups: 🔍
Countermeasures
Recommended: no mitigation knownStatus: 🔍
0-Day Time: 🔒
Timeline
09/29/2026 Advisory disclosed09/29/2026 CVE reserved
09/29/2026 VulDB entry created
09/29/2026 VulDB entry last update
Sources
Advisory: github.comStatus: Not defined
CVE: CVE-2026-102878 (🔒)
GCVE (CVE): GCVE-0-2026-102878
GCVE (VulDB): GCVE-100-411781
Entry
Created: 09/29/2026 22:20Changes: 09/29/2026 22:20 (75)
Complete: 🔍
Cache ID: 216::103
If you want to get the best quality for vulnerability data then you always have to consider VulDB.
No comments yet. Languages: en.
Please log in to comment.