CVE-2010-0236
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 kernel in Microsoft Windows 2000 SP4, XP SP2 and SP3, Server 2003 SP2, and Vista Gold does not properly allocate memory for the destination key associated with a symbolic-link registry key, which allows local users to gain privileges via a crafted application, aka "Windows Kernel Memory Allocation Vulnerability."
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 · moderate confidenceThe Windows Kernel fails to properly allocate memory for destination keys associated with symbolic-link registry keys, allowing local attackers to craft malicious applications that exploit this memory allocation flaw to elevate privileges to SYSTEM level.
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 dataall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsall versionsCVSS 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
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Authentication
- None
- Confidentiality
- Complete
- Integrity
- Complete
- Availability
- Complete
AV:L/AC:L/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 Windows versionRun 'winver' or check System Properties, or use 'wmic os get Caption,Version' from command promptAffected if Version shows Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Server 2003, or Windows Vista (any edition)
-
Confirm patch KB976749 is not installedCheck for the presence of security update KB976749 by running 'wmic qfe list' or viewing Installed Updates in Control PanelAffected if The patch KB976749 is absent from the installed updates list, indicating MS10-015 has not been applied
-
Verify kernel vulnerability statusSince this is a kernel-level flaw in symbolic-link registry key handling with no configurable workaround, the vulnerability exists if the OS is an affected version AND KB976749 is not installedAffected if System runs an unpatched Windows 2000/XP/2003/Vista installation
A system is affected if it runs Windows 2000, Windows XP, Windows Server 2003, or Windows Vista and lacks the KB976749 security update (MS10-015).
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.
From vendor dataApply the relevant Microsoft security patch (MS10-015) for affected Windows versions. For end-of-life systems that cannot be patched, implement compensating controls such as restricting local user permissions, application whitelisting, and preventing execution of untrusted code.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA3.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $7,040.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2010-0236 — 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-2010-0236 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