ChromeWeb browser · Google
CVE-2016-1671
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 50.0.2661.102 on Android mishandles / (slash) and \ (backslash) characters, which allows attackers to conduct directory traversal attacks via a file: URL, related to net/base/escape.cc and net/base/filename_util.cc.
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 50.0.2661.102 on Android contains a directory traversal vulnerability in its file: URL handling. The browser improperly processes / and \ characters in file URLs, allowing path traversal sequences (such as ../) to escape the intended directory and access arbitrary files on the device's filesystem. The flaw resides in net/base/escape.cc and net/base/filename_util.cc.
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
ChromeWeb browser
<= 50.0.2661.87CVSS 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
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/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 Google Chrome version on AndroidOpen Chrome on the Android device, navigate to chrome://version, or check the version in the Google Play Store app under the Chrome listingAffected if The displayed version number is 50.0.2661.87 or lower
-
Verify the affected component is presentThe vulnerability exists in the net/base/escape.cc and net/base/filename_util.cc files within the Chrome binary. These components handle file: URL parsing and are included in all standard Chrome installations on Android.Affected if The file: URL handling functionality is present (this is a standard feature in Chrome for Android)
-
Confirm file: URL access is possibleThe vulnerability can be triggered when Chrome processes a file: URL containing path traversal sequences such as ../ . Test by attempting to access a file: URL with traversal patterns in the Chrome address bar on the Android device.Affected if Chrome processes the file: URL and allows traversal sequences to escape the intended directory, accessing files outside the intended scope
A user is affected if Google Chrome for Android is version 50.0.2661.87 or lower, as this version contains the vulnerable file: URL handling code in escape.cc and filename_util.cc that improperly processes path traversal characters.
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 for Android to version 50.0.2661.102 or later. For organizations using Chromium-based custom browsers, apply the vendor patch to the filename_util.cc and escape.cc files to enforce proper path normalization and validation on file: URLs.
Fix this in Chrome
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-1671 — 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-2016-1671 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