This is finding the spare key after you already broke into the house
CVE-2026-11275 is an *Android Chrome* flaw in the Page Info surface that lets an attacker who has already compromised the renderer process bypass navigation restrictions using a crafted HTML page. The affected range is Google Chrome on Android before 149.0.7827.53; the user-provided disclosure date is 2026-06-05. This is not a first-stage browser RCE by itself, and it is not an OS sandbox escape by itself.
The vendor's MEDIUM 6.5 is too generous for enterprise patch triage because the decisive prerequisite is enormous: the attacker must first land a separate renderer compromise. That means this bug is mostly useful as a *post-exploitation chain component* inside Chrome, not as a broad internet-scale entry point. Chrome's own upstream labeling reflected that reality by calling the Chromium security severity Low.
4 steps from start to impact.
Lure the victim onto attacker-controlled web content
- Victim uses Chrome on Android below 149.0.7827.53
- Victim browses attacker-controlled or attacker-influenced content
- User interaction is required
- This is client-side and user-driven, so there is no mass unauthenticated network reachability
- Safe Browsing, link filtering, and user behavior reduce first contact volume
Land a separate renderer compromise first
- A second vulnerability must be available to compromise the renderer
- The renderer exploit must work on the target Chrome/Android combination
- This is the dominant downgrade factor: requiring a prior renderer compromise pushes the bug out of the initial-access bucket
- Modern browser hardening, site isolation, crash telemetry, and exploit mitigations raise the cost substantially
- Public reporting reviewed here does not show in-the-wild abuse of this CVE
Abuse Page Info to bypass navigation restrictions
- Chrome Android build is still vulnerable
- Attack path reaches the Page Info code path
- The crafted page successfully triggers the flawed navigation logic
- The bug is Android-specific, which trims affected enterprise population compared with all-platform Chrome issues
- Feature-specific logic bugs are often brittle across versions and device variants
Exploit the gained browser-integrity foothold
- A target workflow where forced navigation or browser trust matters
- Victim remains engaged long enough for the follow-on action
- No evidence reviewed shows direct sandbox escape, arbitrary app install, or turnkey data theft from this CVE alone
- Blast radius is primarily the current browser session or user workflow, not wholesale enterprise takeover
The supporting signals.
| In-the-wild status | No confirmed active exploitation found in reviewed public sources, and the user-provided KEV status is No. |
|---|---|
| KEV status | Not listed in the CISA KEV catalog as reviewed. |
| PoC availability | No public PoC located for CVE-2026-11275 specifically. That matters because exploitation already depends on a *separate renderer-compromise bug*. |
| EPSS | User-provided EPSS is 0.0002, which is *extremely low*. I did not independently verify the exact percentile from FIRST in the sources reviewed. |
| CVSS interpretation | AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N looks scarier than reality because PR:N hides the practical prerequisite: the description says the attacker must have already compromised the renderer process. |
| Affected versions | Google Chrome on Android prior to 149.0.7827.53. |
| Fixed versions | Vendor fix point is 149.0.7827.53 or later for Chrome on Android. Downstream Linux package ecosystems also show backported Chromium package fixes, e.g. openSUSE Tumbleweed chromium >= 149.0.7827.53-2.1. |
| Vendor vs upstream severity | User-provided vendor severity is MEDIUM 6.5, but the reviewed upstream text reports Chromium security severity: Low. |
| Exposure/scanning reality | Not meaningfully internet-scannable. Shodan/Censys/FOFA-style exposure counts are largely irrelevant because this is a *client-side Android browser bug*, not a remotely exposed server daemon. |
| Disclosure / reporting | Public disclosure date provided is 2026-06-05. I did not find a public researcher credit in the sources reviewed. |
noisgate verdict.
The single biggest severity suppressor is the requirement for a prior renderer compromise. That means CVE-2026-11275 is not a realistic first-hop enterprise intrusion path; it is a narrow browser chain enhancer whose reachable population and standalone blast radius are both limited.
Why this verdict
- Massive prerequisite downgrade: the attacker must *already* have compromised Chrome's renderer process, which implies a separate exploit chain and pushes this out of the initial-access bucket.
- Reachability is narrow: this is Android Chrome only, user-driven, and client-side; there is no internet-exposed service to spray at scale across your estate.
- Threat signals are weak: no KEV listing, no confirmed public in-the-wild exploitation found, no public PoC found, and the user-provided EPSS of 0.0002 is extremely low.
Why not higher?
A higher rating would require either evidence of active exploitation, a reliable public exploit chain, or a bug that stands on its own as an entry point. This one does none of that. The need for an existing renderer foothold is compounding downward pressure because it assumes the attacker has already cleared the hardest part.
Why not lower?
It is still a real security boundary failure inside one of the most widely deployed browsers on mobile, and integrity-impact bugs in browser navigation can support phishing or workflow abuse. If an actor already has a renderer exploit, this bug can improve the quality of that chain, so it is not ignorable noise.
What to do — in priority order.
- Enforce Chrome auto-update on managed Android — Use EMM / managed Google Play policy to keep Chrome on current stable so vulnerable builds age out naturally. For a LOW verdict, there is no SLA beyond backlog hygiene, so fold this into the normal mobile app maintenance cycle rather than emergency work.
- Block stale browser versions from high-risk workflows — Apply conditional access or web access policy for sensitive internal apps where feasible, especially for identity, finance, and admin portals. This reduces the value of browser-integrity abuse and can be rolled into your normal policy-review cycle because there is no urgent mitigation clock here.
- Reduce first-stage browser exploit exposure — Keep Safe Browsing protections enabled, restrict sideloading, and use mobile threat defense or secure web gateway controls where available. The best defense here is stopping the *separate renderer compromise* that this CVE depends on.
- Inventory Android Chrome laggards — Query your device fleet for versions below
149.0.7827.53and identify devices not receiving Play updates. Treat remediation as routine backlog hygiene unless new exploitation evidence appears.
- A WAF does not help; the vulnerable component is the client browser, not your web server.
- Network IPS signatures are weak value here because the attacker can deliver ordinary web content and the meaningful trigger happens *after* a renderer compromise inside the browser.
- MFA does not prevent the vulnerability itself; it only reduces damage in some phishing-style follow-on scenarios.
Crowdsourced verification payload.
Run this from an auditor workstation that has adb access to the target Android device; no root is required, but the device must allow ADB/managed debugging. Invoke it as ./check_cve_2026_11275.sh <device-serial> or, for a single attached device, just ./check_cve_2026_11275.sh.
#!/usr/bin/env bash
# check_cve_2026_11275.sh
# Detects whether Google Chrome on Android is below 149.0.7827.53
# Output: VULNERABLE / PATCHED / UNKNOWN
# Exit codes: 0=PATCHED, 1=VULNERABLE, 2=UNKNOWN
set -u
PKG="com.android.chrome"
FIXED="149.0.7827.53"
SERIAL="${1:-}"
ADB=(adb)
if [[ -n "$SERIAL" ]]; then
ADB+=( -s "$SERIAL" )
fi
fail_unknown() {
echo "UNKNOWN: $1"
exit 2
}
ver_lt() {
# returns 0 if $1 < $2 using version sort
local first
first=$(printf '%s\n%s\n' "$1" "$2" | sort -V | head -n1)
[[ "$1" != "$2" && "$first" == "$1" ]]
}
command -v adb >/dev/null 2>&1 || fail_unknown "adb not found in PATH"
${ADB[@]} get-state >/dev/null 2>&1 || fail_unknown "no reachable Android device via adb"
pkg_path=$(${ADB[@]} shell pm path "$PKG" 2>/dev/null | tr -d '\r')
[[ -n "$pkg_path" ]] || fail_unknown "Chrome package $PKG not installed or not visible"
version=$(${ADB[@]} shell dumpsys package "$PKG" 2>/dev/null | tr -d '\r' | sed -n 's/.*versionName=\([^ ]*\).*/\1/p' | head -n1)
[[ -n "$version" ]] || fail_unknown "could not determine Chrome versionName"
if ver_lt "$version" "$FIXED"; then
echo "VULNERABLE: Chrome version $version is below fixed version $FIXED"
exit 1
else
echo "PATCHED: Chrome version $version is at or above fixed version $FIXED"
exit 0
fi
If you remember one thing.
Sources
What defenders are saying.
Crowdsourced verification outputs.
Results submitted by users who ran the verification payload against their environment.