CVE-2026-118349
Description
A memory corruption flaw was found in the Payments component of the Chromium browser.
Upstream bug(s):
Statement
Red Hat Product Security rates the severity of this flaw as determined by the Google Chrome Security Advisory.
Mitigation
--- CME Mitigation Guidance (2026-11-03) ---
Disclaimer: The following mitigation solutions are provided as a courtesy, pending the application of an official patch. This content was generated utilizing AI tools in conjunction with data from https://cmetaxonomy.org. Customers are advised to independently evaluate and test these temporary mitigations within their own infrastructure.
The highest-value action is to enforce Control Flow Integrity and Shadow Call Stack to validate indirect call targets and branch destinations, blocking control flow hijacking originating from the Payments component: upgrade to Google Chrome 156.0.8078.73 (or the fixed Chromium builds), which remediates the memory corruption flaw within the Payments component, closing crafted HTML page. Until patched, this is a concern on Users accessing web content across any platform, so Restrict user navigation to untrusted or external HTML pages and maintain browser sandbox isolation. As a compensating measure, Enable ASLR to randomize userspace process memory layouts and impede target address resolution, Enforce NX/XD non-executable memory permissions on writable regions to block shellcode execution, Enforce full RELRO and PIE to protect global offset tables and randomize code segments, Enable FORTIFY_SOURCE buffer boundary checks to intercept memory overflow attempts, Apply kernel-level syscall filtering with seccomp to contain code execution within the sandbox, and Deploy EDR agents to monitor anomalous behavioral patterns originating from browser processes. These controls limit blast radius and contain exploitation, but they do not fix the underlying Payments memory corruption defect — apply the upstream patch to fully remediate.
Highest-impact CME: CME-113 Control Flow Integrity (CFI / Shadow Call Stack) (high)
Understanding the Weakness (CWE)
Integrity,Confidentiality,Availability
Technical Impact: Execute Unauthorized Code or Commands; Modify Memory
This may result in read or write operations on unexpected memory locations that could be linked to other variables, data structures, or internal program data. If the memory accessible by the attacker can be effectively controlled, it may be possible to execute arbitrary code, as with a standard buffer overflow. If the attacker can overwrite a pointer's worth of memory (usually 32 or 64 bits), they can alter the intended control flow by redirecting a function pointer to their own malicious code. Even when the attacker can only modify a single byte, arbitrary code execution can be possible. Sometimes this is because the same problem can be exploited repeatedly to the same effect. Other times it is because the attacker can overwrite security-critical application-specific data -- such as a flag indicating whether the user is an administrator.
Availability,Confidentiality
Technical Impact: Read Memory; DoS: Crash, Exit, or Restart; DoS: Resource Consumption (CPU); DoS: Resource Consumption (Memory)
Out of bounds memory access will very likely result in the corruption of relevant memory, and perhaps instructions, possibly leading to a crash. Other attacks leading to lack of availability are possible, including putting the program into an infinite loop.
Confidentiality
Technical Impact: Read Memory
In the case of an out-of-bounds read, the attacker may have access to sensitive information. If the sensitive information contains system details, such as the current buffer's position in memory, this knowledge can be used to craft further attacks, possibly with more severe consequences.
Frequently Asked Questions
Not sure what something means? Check out our Security Glossary.
Want to get errata notifications? Sign up here.
