Renderer code execution via inconsistent V8 reparsing
Published Dec 2, 2022 · Updated Oct 21, 2025
Type confusion in V8 in Google Chrome before 108.0.5359.94 allows remote attackers to execute code through a crafted HTML page. V8's JavaScript parser handles direct eval with different strictness during initial parsing and reparsing, producing mismatched bytecode that reuses incompatible feedback vectors. A user must load attacker-controlled HTML and trigger bytecode aging; exploitation creates arbitrary read/write primitives and renderer code execution, while sandbox escape requires a separate flaw.
Summary
What happened
Type confusion in V8 in Google Chrome before 108.0.5359.94 allows remote attackers to execute code through a crafted HTML page. V8's JavaScript parser handles direct eval with different strictness during initial parsing and reparsing, producing mismatched bytecode that reuses incompatible feedback vectors. A user must load attacker-controlled HTML and trigger bytecode aging; exploitation creates arbitrary read/write primitives and renderer code execution, while sandbox escape requires a separate flaw.
The record
- CVE
- CVE-2022-4262
- Published
- Dec 2, 2022
- Updated
- Oct 21, 2025
- Vendor
- Google Cloud
- Product
- Google Chrome
- Classifications
- CWE-843, T1203
- Attack vector
- network
- Privileges
- unauthenticated
Timeline
How it unfolded
- Dec 2, 2022CVE publishedPublication date reported by the CVE source.
- Oct 21, 2025Record updatedLatest update available in the CVE record.
Exploitability
Present is not the same as exploitable
Compare your product and version with the public record. A matching version still requires validation against your environment.
Is a vulnerable build present?
Compare these published version ranges with your installed build and any vendor patches.
- Affected versionversion=unspecified <108.0.5359.94
What conditions does exploitation require?
What is affected?
Published CVSS scores
CVSS describes severity. EPSS estimates exploitation probability.
Attacks
What attackers are doing with it
Daily unique IPs observed by Shadowserver honeypots for known exploited vulnerabilities (KEVs). Missing observations do not establish an absence of attacks.
Weakness, pattern, technique
Public exploit references
- Google Project Zero proof of conceptproof of concept · demonstrated
Labels summarize the accepted research assessment. They do not indicate a test against your environment.
Reported exploitation
- Samsung device renderer-RCE exploit chainexploit chain
- CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities Catalog listingknown exploited catalog
Technologies
Your stack
See the directory against your own environment.
Your stack
Check the software in your environment
Book a demo to see how Hinoki identifies affected software and validates exploitability in your environment.
Book a demo