Serious Chrome zero-day
I&#x27;ll be that guy.<p>Chrome has probably invested &gt; 1 billion dollars into their codebase at this point. Certainly &gt;100million into security.<p>They sandbox their code <i>aggressively</i>. They build this project with security in mind from day 1 - it&#x27;s been architected for it.<p>The Chrome security team(s) has a lot of power for a product security org.<p>They fuzz. They invent new fuzzers. They cluster their fuzzers.<p>They have a world class bounty program.<p>They have a world class research team for finding vulns.<p>They invent or otherwise aggressively adopt mitigation techniques.<p>But someone out there did it.<p>Their track record for security is something to really be proud of - this is the first public ITW exploit of its type that I am aware of. But users are getting owned because of, at the very least, a Use After Free vulnerability.<p>Let&#x27;s just collectively admit it, finally - you can&#x27;t write safe C++ in a codebase this complex.<p>edit: (From a post below)<p>To be clear, I&#x27;m not saying &quot;Chrome should be rewritten in a memory safe language&quot;, I&#x27;m saying that Chrome is an excellent project to point to, say &quot;Wow, no one does as much to secure a codebase as them&quot;, and to follow that up with &quot;and they still got owned by UAF&quot;.