CVE-2013-0925
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedGoogle Chrome before 26.0.1410.43 does not ensure that an extension has the tabs (aka APIPermission::kTab) permission before providing a URL to this extension, which has unspecified impact and remote attack vectors.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceGoogle Chrome before version 26.0.1410.43 fails to verify that extensions have the 'tabs' permission (APIPermission::kTab) before exposing URL information to them. This allows extensions to potentially receive sensitive URL data they should not have access to, representing an information disclosure vulnerability with remote attack vectors.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data<= 26.0.1410.42= 26.0.1410.0= 26.0.1410.1= 26.0.1410.2= 26.0.1410.3= 26.0.1410.4= 26.0.1410.5= 26.0.1410.6= 26.0.1410.7= 26.0.1410.8= 26.0.1410.9= 26.0.1410.10CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Partial
- Integrity
- Partial
- Availability
- Partial
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:P/A:P
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Determine Chrome versionOpen Chrome and navigate to chrome://version, or click Menu > Help > About Google Chrome to view the installed version numberAffected if The displayed version is 26.0.1410.42 or lower, or matches any of the specific affected builds (26.0.1410.0 through 26.0.1410.10)
-
Compare against vulnerable rangeCompare your installed version to the affected versions listed in the CVE (26.0.1410.0 to 26.0.1410.42)Affected if Your version falls within 26.0.1410.0 through 26.0.1410.42 inclusive
-
Identify installed extensionsNavigate to chrome://extensions and review the list of installed extensionsAffected if Any extensions are installed while running a vulnerable Chrome version (the vulnerability allows extensions to receive URL data without proper tabs permission)
You are affected if your installed Google Chrome version is 26.0.1410.42 or lower (including the specific builds 26.0.1410.0 through 26.0.1410.10), regardless of which extensions you have installed.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataUpdate Google Chrome to version 26.0.1410.43 or later to obtain the fix that properly enforces the tabs permission requirement before exposing URLs to extensions.
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation1.0 h
- Testing1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,200.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2013-0925 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2013-0925 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data