CVE-2025-34091VulnerabilityPublished 2 Jul 2025Updated 24 Jul 2025

CVE-2025-34091: Google Chrome

Affects Google ChromeSource CVE Database V5

Not known to be exploited.

Data as of 18 Aug 2025, 01:22 UTC

Severity

Unrated

Rated by Threat Radar · No CVSS score from NVD or the CNA

CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:H/AT:P/PR:L/UI:N/VC:H/VI:H/VA:H/SC:H/SI:H/SA:H

Attack Vector: Local
Attack Complexity: High
Attack Requirements: Present
Privileges Required: Low
User Interaction: None
Vulnerable system confidentiality: High
Vulnerable system integrity: High
Vulnerable system availability: High
Subsequent system confidentiality: High
Subsequent system integrity: High
Subsequent system availability: High

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

Attack Vector: Local: The vulnerable system is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Either the attacker exploits the vulnerability by accessing the target system locally (e.g., keyboard, console), or through terminal emulation (e.g., SSH); or the attacker relies on User Interaction by another person to perform actions required to exploit the vulnerability (e.g., using social engineering techniques to trick a legitimate user into opening a malicious document).
Attack Complexity: High: The successful attack depends on the evasion or circumvention of security-enhancing techniques in place that would otherwise hinder the attack. These include: Evasion of exploit mitigation techniques, for example, circumvention of address space randomization (ASLR) or data execution prevention (DEP) must be performed for the attack to be successful; Obtaining target-specific secrets. The attacker must gather some target-specific secret before the attack can be successful. A secret is any piece of information that cannot be obtained through any amount of reconnaissance. To obtain the secret the attacker must perform additional attacks or break otherwise secure measures (e.g. knowledge of a secret key may be needed to break a crypto channel). This operation must be performed for each attacked target.
Attack Requirements: Present: The successful attack depends on the presence of specific deployment and execution conditions of the vulnerable system that enable the attack. These include: a race condition must be won to successfully exploit the vulnerability (the successfulness of the attack is conditioned on execution conditions that are not under full control of the attacker, or the attack may need to be launched multiple times against a single target before being successful); the attacker must inject themselves into the logical network path between the target and the resource requested by the victim (e.g. vulnerabilities requiring an on-path attacker).
Privileges Required: Low: The attacker requires privileges that provide basic capabilities that are typically limited to settings and resources owned by a single low-privileged user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources.
User Interaction: None: The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any human user, other than the attacker.
Vulnerable system confidentiality: High: There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all information within the Vulnerable System being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.
Vulnerable system integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the vulnerable system. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the vulnerable system.
Vulnerable system availability: High: There is a total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the Vulnerable System; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the Vulnerable System (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).
Subsequent system confidentiality: High: There is a total loss of confidentiality, resulting in all resources within the Subsequent System being divulged to the attacker. Alternatively, access to only some restricted information is obtained, but the disclosed information presents a direct, serious impact. For example, an attacker steals the administrator's password, or private encryption keys of a web server.
Subsequent system integrity: High: There is a total loss of integrity, or a complete loss of protection. For example, the attacker is able to modify any/all files protected by the Subsequent System. Alternatively, only some files can be modified, but malicious modification would present a direct, serious consequence to the Subsequent System.
Subsequent system availability: High: There is a total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the Subsequent System; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the Subsequent System (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable).

Definitions: FIRST CVSS v4.0 specification.

Exploitation evidence

Disclosed: evidence found.
CVE published 2 Jul 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

AI-suggested

Given the local and privileged nature of the vulnerability, European organizations should implement strict endpoint security measures, including limiting user privileges to the minimum necessary, enforcing application whitelisting, and monitoring for unusual local activity. Regularly updating Chrome to the latest versions once patches become available is critical. Until a patch is released, organizations should consider restricting local access to systems running Chrome, especially in shared or public environments. Employing robust user account controls, such as disabling unnecessary local accounts and enforcing strong authentication, will reduce the risk of exploitation. Additionally, deploying advanced endpoint detection and response (EDR) solutions can help identify attempts to exploit this vulnerability. Network segmentation to isolate critical systems and limiting lateral movement within networks will also mitigate potential impact. Finally, educating users about the risks of local malware and insider threats complements technical controls.

Impact

For European organizations, this vulnerability poses a significant risk primarily in environments where Chrome is used on multi-user systems or where attackers can gain initial local access, such as through phishing, malware, or insider threats. Successful exploitation could lead to full compromise of the browser and potentially the underlying operating system, resulting in data theft, unauthorized access to sensitive information, and disruption of services. This is particularly critical for sectors relying heavily on Chrome for web applications, including financial services, government agencies, and critical infrastructure operators. The high impact on confidentiality, integrity, and availability means that sensitive data could be exfiltrated or manipulated, and systems could be rendered unstable or unavailable. The absence of known exploits in the wild currently reduces immediate risk but also indicates that organizations should proactively prepare for potential future exploitation. The local attack vector means that endpoint security and internal access controls are crucial to mitigating risk.

Summary

CVE-2025-34091 is a vulnerability identified in Google Chrome, as recorded in the CVE Database version 5. The CVSS vector string provided corresponds to version 4.0 and indicates a complex vulnerability with multiple high-impact metrics. Specifically, the attack vector is local (AV:L), meaning exploitation requires local access to the system. The attack complexity is high (AC:H), indicating that exploitation is difficult and requires specific conditions. The attack requires privileges (PR:L) and user interaction is not required (UI:N), suggesting that an attacker with limited privileges on the local machine could exploit this vulnerability without needing to trick the user. The vulnerability impacts confidentiality, integrity, and availability all at a high level (VC:H, VI:H, VA:H), and the scope is high (SC:H), meaning the vulnerability affects resources beyond the initially vulnerable component. The lack of affected versions and detailed technical description limits the ability to analyze the exact nature of the flaw, but given the CVSS vector, it likely involves a local privilege escalation or a sandbox escape within Chrome that could lead to full compromise of the browser and potentially the host system. The requirement for local access and privileges reduces the risk of remote exploitation but does not eliminate the threat, especially in environments where multiple users share systems or where malware has already gained limited access.

Community reviews

Loading reviews…

Exploitation evidence

What to do

AI analysisMachine-generated, updated 25 Jul 2025, 00:44 UTC

Impact

Summary

Technical details

Community reviews

Related threats