CVE-2016-2845
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 Content Security Policy (CSP) implementation in Blink, as used in Google Chrome before 49.0.2623.75, does not ignore a URL's path component in the case of a ServiceWorker fetch, which allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive information about visited web pages by reading CSP violation reports, related to FrameFetchContext.cpp and ResourceFetcher.cpp.
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 confidenceThe Content Security Policy (CSP) implementation in Blink (Chrome's rendering engine) fails to ignore URL path components during ServiceWorker fetch operations. This causes the full URL path (not just the origin) to be included in CSP violation reports, potentially exposing which specific pages a user visited to attackers who can trigger or intercept these reports.
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<= 48.0.2564.116CVSS 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
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- Low
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- None
CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:L/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 Google Chrome versionOpen chrome://version in the Chrome address bar or go to Settings > About Chrome to view the installed version numberAffected if The displayed version is 48.0.2564.116 or earlier (any version <= 48.0.2564.116)
-
Confirm ServiceWorker usageOpen Developer Tools (F12), go to the Application tab, and check the Service Workers panel for any registered service workersAffected if Any ServiceWorker is registered and handling fetch events in the browser context
-
Inspect CSP violation report payloadIf you have access to CSP violation reports from your web application, examine the blocked-uri or document-uri fields in the JSON report for full URL paths rather than just originsAffected if CSP reports contain full URL paths (including specific page paths) instead of only the origin portion
User is affected if running Google Chrome version 48.0.2564.116 or earlier AND using web applications that register ServiceWorkers with CSP policies that generate violation reports.
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 49.0.2623.75 or later. No server-side changes are required as this is a browser vulnerability.
- Consultation1.0 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 $1,200.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2016-2845 — 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-2016-2845 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