Hacker News Reader

Comment by basilikum | Hacker News Reader

For what is this exploited in the wild when it doesn't include a sandbox escape?

Is this chained with n-days?

There's a risk that someone had been sitting on a sandbox escape that assumed having RCE inside the sandbox first, and so they'd been waiting for an RCE exactly like this one.

Those folks would not be disclosing their sandbox escape unless they were good guys.

(Posted with a memory safe WebKit, Fil-C FTW)

You should add a disclaimer that you are the CEO of Fil-C. /s

In the context of this vulnerability, I doubt memory safety would have made much of a difference.

This is a great reminder though, currently doing a full userspace replacement on my 3D printer and Fil-C might be just what I need for the irreplaceable C parts.

How would memory safety have not made a difference?

Type confusion, leads to using an object in memory with the wrong type, that means accessing memory with a different layout, like an out of bounds buffer.

So I think memory safety does matter in that case.

If it's in the CISA known exploited vulnerabilities catalog, tell me if I'm wrong but I assume people don't go around exploiting million dollar 0-days in public just to fuck around safely in a chrome sandbox.

So maybe we're going to see another CVE for the sandbox escape soon?

Crypto mining would be one application. But also, combined with a sandbox escape would make it particularly devastating. Usually full control of a device takes at least two exploits given the layers of security present in OS and browser environments.

It would be chained with a separate 0day sandbox escape.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com