I prefer firefox, but doesn't firefox have a history of more similar exploits?
Actively exploited sandbox RCE in all Chromium versions
341–350 of 524 posts
Re: Actively exploited sandbox RCE in all Chromium versions
#342It’s really a shame that my engineering school requires me to use Google Chrome because their Honorlock browser extension[1] requires Google Chrome.
You would think that an engineering school would be wiser than to require their students use a specific web browser that’s tied to a specific vendor.
Re: Actively exploited sandbox RCE in all Chromium versions
#343Earlier quoted context omitted.
My thought exactly. Which is why I have NoScript in my Firefox and have gotten used to manually enabling javascript for select pages. Small price to pay. Unfortunately the web is full of trivial websites that have no business running javascript. Recently wanted to read the famed post on Gates Notes. But for some reason Bill requires javascript to render text and images. Which reminded me Bill is not a person with goo…
Wow... I understand your point but if you feel that strong about gates using js on his personal website, it is a bit harsh isn't it? Could have multiple reasons why it is needed. Especially for someone with such a huge follower base. Lazy loading, tracking, client based adjustments, using a framework, fun [:)]... I could go on with a 100 more points why js might be needed.
HTML has lazy loading.
There not a lot of reason to not have at least a fallback to serve your text-only content without JS.
Re: Actively exploited sandbox RCE in all Chromium versions
#344Let's take a moment to talk about the monetary value of this vulnerability. According to the Chrome release page ( https://chromereleases.googleblog.com/2026/09/stable-channel... ), Google paid a researcher $1000 for ethically reporting this. The CVE associated with it (CVE-2026-85046) is already being exploited in the wild. If we put our thinking caps on, how much do you think this vulnerability is actually worth? H…
> But at the same time, if someone submits a critical issue like this, it makes sense to pay them what the bug's actually worth. I'd point out that part of the reason the grey and black market pays so well is because it is that type of market. You have to pay people extra to look past their morals and a risk premium against potential reputational and legal consequences. That said, the gap is probably not just that.
[dead]
Re: Actively exploited sandbox RCE in all Chromium versions
#345I prefer firefox, but doesn't firefox have a history of more similar exploits?
Pretty sure every browser has that history
Re: Actively exploited sandbox RCE in all Chromium versions
#346Re: Actively exploited sandbox RCE in all Chromium versions
#347Normalising running arbitrary code delivered over the internet (in the form of JavaScript and WASM), as a necessary condition for accessing most web pages may not have been one of the best decisions we have made.
I think the problem is that we've let JS engines become absurdly complex so there's no way to avoid them having really gross bugs. That said, I think that the V8 team has done a fantastic job of securing their engine. Their heap sandbox feature is really inspiring! It's really wild that (as far as I can understand this issue) someone is able to bypass it. (Posted from a memory safe browser - WebKit MiniBrowser compil…
When Chromium and V8 are written in a memory-safe language then I might believe this.
Yes, if your JavaScript engine is written in C++, it’s going to be very hard to avoid very gross bugs. We have better options now.
The ability of adversaries to find and exploit very gross bugs in C++ codebases should have already compelled the industry to move to memory safety. Now that AI has democratized the ability to scour C++ codebases for really gross and exploitable bugs, I should think that our hands are at last being forced. I’m not impressed by what I’ve seen in the industry with respect to taking memory safety seriously.
Re: Actively exploited sandbox RCE in all Chromium versions
#348Sandbox RCE again. Every "it's sandboxed so it's safe" pitch really means "we hope the sandbox holds." Not a security model, just a sentence.
This is missing the point. The whole point of a "sandbox" in the sense of defense in depth is precisely because it's expected that first-line security guarantees will be broken. Like, maybe V8 has a bug and you can write Javascript that fools it into running arbitrary binary code. But that's less dangerous, because the V8 engine runs in a process sandbox and doesn't have access to the rest of the browser state.
Which is exactly what happened here, as it turns out. This isn't a breakout (or isn't alleged to be a breakout) to the broader OS, only to the sandbox environment.
Re: Actively exploited sandbox RCE in all Chromium versions
#349Earlier quoted context omitted.
I say this as someone does NOT disable JS in my main browser (because like, I have a job), but also knows a fair bit about why Firefox inside Tails now restarts in some cases... It's the classic thing. Across every gdmf metric, excluding with "true empathy", no one *gives a fuck* until it affects them, or someone within (1-3) degrees of separatation. And having broad empathy is generally a good way to get yourself la…
Is compriate a typo, a neologism? I could not find a definition.
The end of that post came out in such a mess, it must be a typo for something - "compatriot" maybe? I like the other standout neologism in there though, I can see it in a dictionary now:
astrocized - banished to outer space.
Re: Actively exploited sandbox RCE in all Chromium versions
#350Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which browser has a better security track record?
Firefox with uBlock Origin. It’s astonishing how many exploits uBO stops before they ever reach your browser engine. It’s the antivirus of the 2020s.
uBlock Origin won't help with this kind of targeted exploit, and Firefox has a much worse security track record.