CVE-2007-0025
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 MFC component in Microsoft Windows 2000 SP4, XP SP2, and 2003 SP1 and Visual Studio .NET 2000, 2002 SP1, 2003, and 2003 SP1 allows user-assisted remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via an RTF file with a malformed OLE object that triggers memory corruption. NOTE: this might be due to a stack-based buffer overflow in the AfxOleSetEditMenu function in MFC42u.dll.
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 confidenceMemory corruption vulnerability in MFC's AfxOleSetEditMenu function (MFC42u.dll) allows remote code execution via RTF files containing malformed OLE objects. The stack-based buffer overflow can be triggered when users open specially crafted RTF files, leading to arbitrary code execution with user privileges.
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= 2000= 2003= 2000= 2003= xp_sp2CVSS 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
- M
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:N/AC:M/Au:N/C:C/I:C/A:C
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.
-
Identify the Windows versionRun 'winver' or check system properties to determine if the system is Windows 2000, Windows XP SP2, or Windows Server 2003.Affected if The installed Windows version is 2000, XP SP2, or Server 2003 (any build).
-
Locate and check MFC42u.dll versionSearch for MFC42u.dll in the system (common paths: C:\Windows\System32\, C:\Windows\SysWOW64\, or Visual Studio installation directories). Right-click the file, select Properties, and note the File Version.Affected if The DLL version is older than the version that includes the MS07-023 fix, or the file exists and you cannot confirm it has been patched.
-
Verify if RTF files with OLE objects can be openedAttempt to open a test RTF file containing an embedded OLE object (such as an embedded Excel or Word object) using Microsoft Word or WordPad.Affected if RTF files with embedded OLE objects open successfully, indicating the vulnerable code path is accessible.
-
Check for security update MS07-023Open Control Panel > Programs and Features > View installed updates, or run 'wmic qfe list' from command prompt, and search for update KB924191 or MS07-023.Affected if The security update KB924191 (MS07-023) is NOT installed.
The system is affected if it runs an unpatched Windows 2000, XP SP2, or Server 2003 with a vulnerable MFC42u.dll version and has the ability to open RTF files containing OLE objects.
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.
dbcve · scopedApply Microsoft security updates (MS07-023 and related patches for this CVE). Until patched, avoid opening untrusted RTF files and disable OLE object embedding in Office applications. Consider upgrading from unsupported Windows versions (2000, XP SP2, 2003 SP1).
Upgrade to a currently supported Windows version (Windows 7 or later for desktop, Windows Server 2008 R2 or later for servers) and Visual Studio .NET 2008 or later
- Navigate to the Microsoft Security Bulletin MS07-023 page at https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/security-updates/securitybulletins/2007/ms07-023
- Download the security update specific to your affected Windows version (Windows 2000 SP4, XP SP2, or Windows 2003 SP1)
- Apply the security update by running the downloaded executable as an administrator
- Restart the affected system if prompted to complete the installation
- Verify the update was installed successfully by checking the installed updates in Add or Remove Programs
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing4.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $4,544.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2007-0025 — 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-2007-0025 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