Where the CRA puts browsers Annex III Class I (2), Art. 7(1), Art. 7(4)
Annex III lists the product categories the CRA treats as "important products with digital elements", split into Class I and Class II. Item 2 of Class I reads "standalone and embedded browsers". A product with digital elements that has the core functionality of that category is an important product and becomes subject to the stricter conformity assessment procedures of Article 32(2).
The wording is deliberately broad. It reaches a desktop or mobile browser you ship as a product, and it reaches a browser embedded as the visible, primary way a device or kiosk lets users reach the web. The plain-language label is only the starting point: the binding definition lives in the implementing act.
Embedded browser versus an app that embeds a WebView Art. 7(1), Art. 7(4)
The sharp question for software teams is the WebView. Almost every mobile and desktop app can embed a web rendering component to show help pages, a login flow, or in-app content. That embedding does not turn the host app into a browser. Article 7(1) is explicit that integrating a component with the core functionality of a listed category does not, in itself, make the surrounding product one of those categories.
The line to watch is whether browsing the open web is the point of your product. A hardened kiosk shell whose sole job is to render arbitrary web destinations looks like an embedded browser; a banking app that opens a WebView for one payment step does not. Resolve close calls against the technical description in Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2392 and record your reasoning.
Judgment call: The CRA gives no bright-line test for "embedded browser" versus "app with a WebView". The implementing act controls the match, so resolve close calls against it and document your reasoning. Until you have done that, the prudent working assumption is that the stricter Class I route applies.
What Class I changes: your conformity route Art. 32(1), Art. 32(2), Annex VIII
For a default-category product a manufacturer may self-assess under internal control (module A). For a Class I important product that choice narrows: internal control remains available only where you apply harmonised standards, common specifications, or a European cybersecurity certification scheme at assurance level at least "substantial", in full, to the relevant essential requirements.
Where you do not, or where no such standard yet exists for a requirement, the browser must go through EU-type examination plus conformity to type (modules B and C) or full quality assurance (module H). Both bring in a notified body, so factor lead time and cost into your plan well before 11 December 2027.
Everything else is the ordinary manufacturer programme Art. 13, Art. 14, Annex I
Class I status changes the conformity route, not the substance. The essential cybersecurity requirements, vulnerability handling including a coordinated vulnerability disclosure policy, technical documentation, CE marking, and the reporting duties for actively exploited vulnerabilities and severe incidents all apply to a browser as they do to any product in scope. For a browser, secure default settings and a working update mechanism carry particular weight.