VulnerabilityPublished 14 Nov 2025

CVE-2024-7021: Google Chrome · Inappropriate Implementation

Affects Google ChromeSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.3 Medium : upgrade to 124.0.6367.60 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 17:16 UTC

CVSS 3.1 base score

4.3Medium

How severe the flaw is on the 0–10 CVSS scale.

EPSS: 0.2% chance of exploitation in 30 days – higher than 14% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 124.0.6367.60

CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:L

Attack Vector: Network
Attack Complexity: Low
Privileges Required: None
User Interaction: Required
Scope: Unchanged
Confidentiality: None
Integrity: None
Availability: Low

Bold values are the worst case: easiest to exploit or largest impact.

Attack Vector: Network: The vulnerable component is bound to the network stack and the set of possible attackers extends beyond the other options listed, up to and including the entire Internet. Such a vulnerability is often termed 'remotely exploitable' and can be thought of as an attack being exploitable at the protocol level one or more network hops away (e.g., across one or more routers).
Attack Complexity: Low: Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success against the vulnerable component.
Privileges Required: None: The attacker is unauthorized prior to attack, and therefore does not require any access to settings or files to carry out an attack.
User Interaction: Required: Successful exploitation of this vulnerability requires a user to take some action before the vulnerability can be exploited.
Scope: Unchanged: An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority.
Confidentiality: None: There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component.
Integrity: None: There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component.
Availability: Low: Performance is reduced or there are interruptions in resource availability. Even if repeated exploitation of the vulnerability is possible, the attacker does not have the ability to completely deny service to legitimate users. The resources in the impacted component are either partially available all of the time, or fully available only some of the time, but overall there is no direct, serious consequence to the impacted component.

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v3.1 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 14 Nov 2025
Detectable: no evidence on record.
No public nuclei template indexed
Weaponised: no evidence on record.
No public exploit code indexed in Metasploit or Exploit-DB
Exploited in the wildExploited: no evidence on record.
Not in CISA KEV and no source reports exploitation
Observed by OffSeq MirageSeen by Mirage: no evidence on record.
No attack traffic recorded by OffSeq Mirage sensors

A missing step is not evidence of safety. Sources: cve.org (opens in a new tab), the Metasploit, Exploit-DB and nuclei-templates index as of 26 Oct 2026.

Disclosed: The CVE record is public on cve.org. Its publication is t = 0.
Detectable: A public nuclei template can find exposed instances, for defenders and attackers alike.
Weaponised: Public exploit code exists in Metasploit or Exploit-DB, or CISA SSVC or the CVSS exploit maturity reports a public proof of concept.
Exploited in the wild: CISA KEV lists it, CISA SSVC rates exploitation active, or a source reports attacks.
Observed by OffSeq Mirage: OffSeq Mirage honeypot sensors recorded attack traffic for this CVE, or found exposed hosts without attack traffic.

Moments are spaced evenly, not to scale; a dashed line marks a gap of six months or more. Deltas count from t = 0. Sources that give only a date (CISA KEV, Exploit-DB, or a time of exactly 00:00Z) read “same day” rather than hours. Metasploit modules carry the flaw’s disclosure date, not their release date, and nuclei templates carry no date, so both appear above but not on the timeline.

What to do

Upgrade Google Chrome to 124.0.6367.60.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Google Chrome	Affected =124.0.6367.60 <124.0.6367.60	Fixed in 124.0.6367.60

AI-suggested

European organizations should implement the following specific mitigation steps: 1) Immediately update all Google Chrome installations on Windows devices to version 124.0.6367.60 or later to apply the official patch. 2) Enforce enterprise-wide browser update policies and automate patch deployment to minimize exposure windows. 3) Educate users about the risks of UI spoofing and train them to recognize suspicious web pages and avoid interacting with unexpected prompts or forms. 4) Deploy web filtering solutions to block access to known malicious or suspicious websites that could host crafted HTML pages exploiting this vulnerability. 5) Utilize endpoint protection tools capable of detecting anomalous browser behavior indicative of UI spoofing attempts. 6) Monitor network traffic and browser logs for unusual patterns that may suggest exploitation attempts. 7) Consider implementing multi-factor authentication (MFA) on critical web services to reduce the impact of credential theft resulting from spoofing attacks. 8) Coordinate with IT and security teams to conduct phishing simulations and reinforce awareness of social engineering tactics leveraging UI spoofing.

Description

Inappropriate implementation in Autofill in Google Chrome on Windows prior to 124.0.6367.60 allowed a remote attacker to perform UI spoofing via a crafted HTML page. (Chromium security severity: Medium)

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability primarily poses a risk of UI spoofing attacks that can facilitate phishing or social engineering campaigns. While it does not directly compromise data confidentiality or integrity, successful exploitation could lead to users being tricked into revealing credentials or other sensitive information, indirectly impacting security posture. The availability impact is low but could cause browser instability or denial of service in targeted scenarios. Given the widespread use of Google Chrome across European enterprises and public sectors, especially in countries with high digital service adoption, the risk of targeted attacks exploiting this vulnerability is notable. Attackers could leverage this flaw to impersonate trusted interfaces, increasing the effectiveness of malicious campaigns. The absence of known exploits reduces immediate risk, but the medium severity rating and ease of exploitation through crafted web content necessitate proactive mitigation. Organizations involved in finance, government, and critical infrastructure sectors are particularly sensitive to UI spoofing due to the potential for fraud or unauthorized access.

CWE-451User Interface (UI) Misrepresentation of Critical Information (opens in a new tab)
Class weaknessOWASP Top 10 A06:2025: Insecure Design (opens in a new tab)
The user interface (UI) does not properly represent critical information to the user, allowing the information - or its source - to be obscured or spoofed. This is often a component in phishing attacks.
Implementation · Input Validation
Perform data validation (e.g. syntax, length, etc.) before interpreting the data.
Architecture and Design · Output Encoding
Create a strategy for presenting information, and plan for how to display unusual characters.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
Secure Design Principles (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Spear Phishing (opens in a new tab)
Mobile Phishing (opens in a new tab)
Phishing (opens in a new tab)
Resource Location Spoofing (opens in a new tab)
Action Spoofing (opens in a new tab)
From MITRE CWE, MITRE CAPEC and OWASP (Top 10, OpenCRE).

References

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

Affected software

Description

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 21 Nov 2025, 04:50 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-451

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats