Debian LinuxOperating system · Debian
CVE-2016-1698
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 createCustomType function in extensions/renderer/resources/binding.js in the extension bindings in Google Chrome before 51.0.2704.79 does not validate module types, which might allow attackers to load arbitrary modules or obtain sensitive information by leveraging a poisoned definition.
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 confidenceA vulnerability in Google Chrome's extension bindings (extensions/renderer/resources/binding.js) allows the createCustomType function to load arbitrary modules or disclose sensitive information due to missing validation of module types. A poisoned module definition could be leveraged to bypass security restrictions.
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
Debian LinuxOperating system
= 8.0
Enterprise Linux DesktopOperating system
= 6.0
Enterprise Linux ServerOperating system
= 6.0
Enterprise Linux WorkstationOperating system
= 6.0
ChromeWeb browser
<= 51.0.2704.63= 42.1= 13.2= 12.0CVSS 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
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/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 if Google Chrome is installedOpen a terminal and run: which google-chrome or which chromium-browser. On Windows, check if Chrome exists in Program Files or Program Files (x86).Affected if Chrome or Chromium is installed on the system
-
Determine the installed Chrome versionNavigate to chrome://settings/help in the browser address bar, or run 'google-chrome --version' in the command line.Affected if The version displayed is 51.0.2704.63 or earlier
-
Compare your version against the affected rangeIf the version is 51.0.2704.63 or lower, your browser falls within the vulnerable range. Versions 51.0.2704.79 and later are patched.Affected if Installed version is less than or equal to 51.0.2704.63
-
Verify if extensions are enabledNavigate to chrome://extensions in the browser and confirm the Extensions feature is not disabled by enterprise policy.Affected if Extensions are enabled and the Chrome version is within the affected range
You are affected if Google Chrome version 51.0.2704.63 or earlier is installed with extensions enabled.
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 51.0.2704.79 or later to obtain the patched version that properly validates module types in the extension bindings.
Fix this in Debian Linux
Scoped from the published advisory
- Consultation1.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing1.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $1,424.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-1698 — 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-2016-1698 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