CVE-2015-1247
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 · uneditedThe SearchEngineTabHelper::OnPageHasOSDD function in browser/ui/search_engines/search_engine_tab_helper.cc in Google Chrome before 42.0.2311.90 does not prevent use of a file: URL for an OpenSearch descriptor XML document, which might allow remote attackers to obtain sensitive information from local files via a crafted (1) http or (2) https web site.
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 confidenceIn Google Chrome before 42.0.2311.90, the SearchEngineTabHelper::OnPageHasOSDD function fails to validate the URL scheme of OpenSearch descriptor XML documents, allowing file: URLs to be processed. This enables a malicious http/https website to trigger the browser into reading local files from the filesystem via the file: protocol, leading to information disclosure.
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<= 42.0.2311.60= 7.0CVSS 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
- None
- Availability
- None
AV:N/AC:L/Au:N/C:P/I:N/A:N
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.
-
Check installed Google Chrome versionOpen chrome://version in the browser address bar, or run 'google-chrome --version' or 'chrome --version' from command lineAffected if Version is 42.0.2311.60 or lower, or any version below 42.0.2311.90
-
Verify Chrome version on Debian LinuxIf on Debian, run 'dpkg -l | grep google-chrome' or check the installed package version with apt policy google-chrome-stableAffected if The installed package version is 42.0.2311.90-1 or lower
-
Confirm Chrome is the default or active browserCheck if Chrome is set as the default browser or commonly used browser on the systemAffected if Chrome is actively used for web browsing, making it a potential vector for malicious websites to exploit this flaw
You are affected if Google Chrome version is 42.0.2311.60 or lower (below the fixed 42.0.2311.90), regardless of operating system, or if you are on Debian 7.0 with an unpatched Chrome package.
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 dataUpgrade Google Chrome to version 42.0.2311.90 or later, which includes proper validation to reject file: URLs in OpenSearch descriptor processing.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $3,328.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2015-1247 — 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-2015-1247 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