CVE-2025-13636VulnerabilityPublished 2 Dec 2025

CVE-2025-13636: Google Chrome · Inappropriate implementation

Affects Google ChromeSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited · CVSS 4.3 Medium : upgrade to 143.0.7499.41 when convenient.

Data as of 26 Oct 2026, 06:26 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 13% of CVEsExploit Prediction Scoring System: the likelihood attackers will use this flaw soon.
Patch: Available – fixed in 143.0.7499.41

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 2 Dec 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 2026-10-26.

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 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 143.0.7499.41.

Affected software

Product	Affected	Fixed in
Google Chrome	Affected =143.0.7499.41 <143.0.7499.41	Fixed in 143.0.7499.41

AI-suggested

To mitigate CVE-2025-13636, European organizations should prioritize updating all Google Chrome installations to version 143.0.7499.41 or later, where the vulnerability is addressed. IT departments should enforce automated browser updates and verify compliance regularly. User education programs should emphasize caution with unfamiliar UI behaviors and discourage performing unusual gestures or interactions prompted by untrusted sources. Implementing browser security policies that restrict navigation to known safe domains or using enterprise-managed browser configurations can reduce exposure. Additionally, deploying advanced phishing detection tools and multi-factor authentication can help mitigate the consequences of successful UI spoofing. Monitoring for suspicious user activity and providing clear reporting channels for suspected phishing attempts will further enhance defense.

Description

Inappropriate implementation in Split View in Google Chrome prior to 143.0.7499.41 allowed a remote attacker who convinced a user to engage in specific UI gestures to perform UI spoofing via a crafted domain name. (Chromium security severity: Low)

Impact

For European organizations, the primary impact of CVE-2025-13636 lies in the increased risk of successful phishing and social engineering attacks leveraging UI spoofing. This can lead to credential theft, unauthorized access, or fraud if users are deceived by the spoofed interface. While the vulnerability does not directly compromise data confidentiality or system integrity, the indirect consequences can be significant, especially for sectors reliant on secure user authentication such as finance, healthcare, and government services. The availability impact is minimal, as the attack does not disrupt browser functionality. However, reputational damage and user trust erosion are potential risks. Organizations with large user bases employing Chrome browsers on desktops or laptops are more exposed. The requirement for user interaction means that effective user awareness and training can mitigate some risk. Additionally, the lack of known exploits in the wild reduces immediate threat levels but does not eliminate future risk.

CWE-290Authentication Bypass by Spoofing (opens in a new tab)
Base weaknessOWASP Top 10 A07:2025: Authentication Failures (opens in a new tab)
This attack-focused weakness is caused by incorrectly implemented authentication schemes that are subject to spoofing attacks.
OWASP Cheat Sheets
REST Security (opens in a new tab)
JSON Web Token for Java (opens in a new tab)
OWASP Authentication (opens in a new tab)
OWASP ASVS 4.0.3
V3.5.1 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.5 (opens in a new tab)
V2.8.4 (opens in a new tab)
Attack patterns
Creating a Rogue Certification Authority Certificate (opens in a new tab)
Web Services API Signature Forgery Leveraging Hash Function Extension Weakness (opens in a new tab)
Signature Spoof (opens in a new tab)
Signature Spoofing by Misrepresentation (opens in a new tab)
Session Credential Falsification through Prediction (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 9 Dec 2025, 20:16 UTC

WeaknessesCWE-290

Technical details

References

Community reviews

Related threats